MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2423304561 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djw134

Molecularly Defined Adult Granulosa Cell Tumor of the Ovary: The Clinical Phenotype

2016· article· en· W2423304561 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Melissa K. McConechy, Anniina Färkkilä, Hugo M. Horlings, Aline Talhouk, Leila Unkila‐Kallio, Hannah S. van Meurs, Winnie Yang, Nirit Rozenberg, Noora Andersson, Katharina Zaby, Saara Bryk, Ralf Bützow, Johannes B G Halfwerk, Gerrit K. Hooijer, Marc J. van de Vijver, Marrije R. Buist, Gemma G. Kenter, Sara Y. Brucker, Bernhard Krämer, Annette Staebler, Maaike C.G. Bleeker, Markku Heikinheimo, Stefan Kommoss, C. Blake Gilks, Mikko Anttonen, David G. Huntsman

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPopulationDiseasePathologyMolecular pathologyPhenotypeInternal medicineCohortMedicineOncologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The histopathologic features of adult granulosa cell tumors (AGCTs) are relatively nonspecific, resulting in misdiagnosis of other cancers as AGCT, a problem that has not been well characterized. FOXL2 mutation testing was used to stratify 336 AGCTs from three European centers into three categories: 1) FOXL2 mutant molecularly defined AGCT (MD-AGCT) (n = 256 of 336), 2) FOXL2 wild-type AGCT (n = 17 of 336), 3) misdiagnosed other tumor types (n = 63 of 336). All statistical tests were two-sided. The overall and disease-specific survival of the misdiagnosed cases was lower than in the MD-AGCTs (P < .001). The misdiagnosed cases accounted for 71.9% of disease-specific deaths within five years. In the population-based cohort, overall survival of MD-AGCT patients was not different from age-matched, population-based controls. Even though 35.2% of all the MD-AGCT patients in our study experienced a relapse, AGCT is usually an indolent disease. The historical, premolecular data underpinning our clinical understanding of AGCT was likely skewed by inclusion of misdiagnosed cases, and future management strategies should reflect the potential for surgical cure and long survival even after relapse.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations83
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207