MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782365191 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000001016

High-grade Endometrioid Carcinoma of the Ovary

2018· article· en· W2782365191 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hisham Assem, Peter Rambau, Sandra Lee, Travis Ogilvie, Anna Sieńko, Linda E. Kelemen, Martin Köbel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCalgary Laboratory Services
KeywordsSerous carcinomaMedicineSerous fluidCarcinomaUnivariate analysisHazard ratioOvarian carcinomaOncologyInternal medicinePopulationPathologyCancerOvarian cancerConfidence intervalMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although infrequently encountered, the diagnosis of ovarian high-grade endometrioid carcinoma remains a diagnostic challenge with potential consequences for targeted therapies and genetic counselling. We studied the clinical, morphologic, and immunohistochemical features of ovarian high-grade endometrioid carcinomas and their diagnostic reproducibility compared with tuboovarian high-grade serous carcinomas. Thirty cases confirmed as International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas were identified from 182 ovarian endometrioid carcinomas diagnosed in Alberta, Canada, between 1978 and 2010, from the population-based Alberta Ovarian Tumor Types cohort. Cases of lower grade endometrioid and high-grade serous carcinoma served for comparison. Ten immunohistochemical markers were assessed on tissue microarrays. Clinical data were abstracted and survival analyses performed using Cox regression. Interobserver reproducibility for histologic type was assessed using 1 representative hematoxylin and eosin-stained slide from 25 randomly selected grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas and 25 high-grade serous carcinomas. Histotype was independently assigned by 5 pathologists initially blinded to immunohistochemical WT1/p53 status, with subsequent reassessment unblinded to WT1/p53 status. Patients diagnosed with grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma had a significantly longer survival compared with high-grade serous carcinoma in univariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR]=0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.16-0.67, P=0.0012) but not after adjusting for age, stage, treatment center, and residual tumor (HR=1.01, 95% CI=0.43-2.16, P=0.98). Grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma cases (N=30) were identical to grade 2 endometrioid carcinoma cases (N=23) with respect to survival in univariate analysis (HR=1.07, 95% CI=0.39-3.21, P=0.89) and immunohistochemical profile. Using histomorphology alone, interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of grade 3 endometrioid or high-grade serous carcinoma was 69%, which significantly increased (P<0.0001) to 96% agreement with the knowledge of WT1/p53 status. Our data support the diagnostic value of WT1/p53 status in differentiating between grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma and high-grade serous carcinoma. However, grade 3 and grade 2 endometrioid carcinomas showed no differences in immunophenotype or clinical parameters, suggesting that they could be combined into a single group.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations47
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207