Diagnostic Impacts of Serum CA-125 Levels, Pap Smear Evaluation, and Endometrial Sampling in Women with Endometrial Clear Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endometrial clear cell carcinoma (ECCC) is a rare variant of endometrial cancer with an unfavorable prognosis. The aim of this study was to determine the relationships, if any, between preoperative serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) levels, the last Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, the results of endometrial biopsy and tumor histology, and disease-stage according to permanent histopathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 26 women with ECCC were collected from their medical records to compare demographics, preoperative serum CA-125 levels, Pap test results, histological diagnosis of the endometrial biopsy, and tumor histology, as well as the disease stage according to permanent histopathology. RESULTS: The mean age at diagnosis was 64.0 years. There were 17 (65.3%) women with pure ECCC and 8 (30.7%) women with a mixed histology. Stage III-IV disease was diagnosed in 12 (46.2%) women and occurred more frequently in pure ECCC (n = 11, 91.7%). CA-125 values were significantly higher in advanced stage disease. Cytological evaluation indicated the presence of 71.4% (10/14) cytological abnormalities in pure ECCC. The overall sensitivity of endometrial sampling for the detection of malignancy was 92.3% (24/26), whereas the accurate diagnosis of ECCC was only 34.7% (8/23) with the Pipelle sampler. CONCLUSION: Pap test abnormalities are frequent in ECCC. Although it is less accurate in the diagnosis of ECCC than in the detection of malignancy, endometrial sampling is still the main procedure for the diagnosis of ECCC. Higher preoperative CA-125 concentrations imply the presence of advanced stage ECCC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".