Second Curettage for Low-Risk Nonmetastatic Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of second uterine curettage in lieu of chemotherapy for patients with low-risk, nonmetastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) and to evaluate whether response to second curettage is independent of patient age, World Health Organization (WHO) risk score, registration human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) level, lesion size, and depth of myometrial invasion measured on ultrasound examination. METHODS: This was a cooperative group multicenter prospective phase II study. Prestudy testing included quantitative hCG level, pelvic ultrasonography, and chest radiography. Patients were categorized according to WHO risk scoring criteria (low risk with a score of 0-6). RESULTS: Sixty-four women with newly diagnosed low-risk, nonmetastatic GTN were enrolled. Four patients were excluded. Twenty-four patients (40%) (lower 95% confidence limit 27.6%) were cured after second curettage. An additional two patients (3%) achieved a complete response but did not complete follow-up. Overall, 26 of 60 patients were able to avoid chemotherapy. Surgical failure was observed in 34 women (59%) and was more common in women 19 years old or younger or 40 years old or older. One case of grade 1 uterine perforation was successfully managed by observation. Four grade 1 and one grade 3 uterine hemorrhages were reported. New metastatic disease (lung) was identified in one of these women after second curettage. In three patients (surgical failures), the second curettage pathology was placental site trophoblastic tumor, and it was placental nodule in one additional patient. CONCLUSION: Second uterine curettage as initial treatment for low-risk, nonmetastatic GTN cures 40% of patients without significant morbidity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT00521118.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".