MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806652534 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000001090

Diagnostic Algorithmic Proposal Based on Comprehensive Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 297 Invasive Endocervical Adenocarcinomas

2018· article· en· W2806652534 on OpenAlexaff
Simona Stolnicu, Iulia Bârsan, Lien Hoang, Prusha Patel, Luis Chiriboga, Cristina Terinte, Anna Pesci, Sarit Aviel‐Ronen, Takako Kiyokawa, Isabel Alvarado‐Cabrero, Malcolm C. Pike, Esther Oliva, Kay J. Park, Robert A. Soslow

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsTissue microarrayVimentinImmunohistochemistryAdenocarcinomaProgesterone receptorPathologyCarcinomaMedicineCancer researchBiologyEstrogen receptorCancerInternal medicineBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification was developed to separate endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs) into 2 main categories on the basis of morphology such as human papilloma virus-associated (HPVA) and non-human papilloma virus-associated adenocarcinomas. We aimed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification by performing a comprehensive immunohistochemical evaluation and constructing objective immunohistochemical-based algorithms for the classification of these tumors. Tissue microarrays were constructed from 297 of 409 cases used to develop the original classification. Immunostains included p16, p53, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor, androgen receptor, Vimentin, CK7, CK20, HER2, HIK1083, MUC6, CA-IX, SATB2, HNF-1beta, napsin A, PAX8, CDX2, GATA3, p63, p40, and TTF-1. High-risk human papilloma virus (HR-HPV) was detected by in situ hybridization (ISH) using probes against E6 and E7 mRNA expressed in 18 different virus types. Vimentin, ER, and progesterone receptor were expressed in a significant minority of ECAs, mostly HPVAs, limiting their use in differential diagnosis of endometrioid carcinoma when unaccompanied by HPV-ISH or p16. HR-HPV ISH had superior sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values compared with p16, as published previously. HNF-1beta did not have the anticipated discriminatory power for clear cell carcinoma, nor did MUC6 or CA-IX for gastric-type carcinoma. HNF-1beta and napsin A were variably expressed in clear cell carcinoma, with HNF-1beta demonstrating less specificity, as it was ubiquitously expressed in gastric-type carcinoma and in the majority of HPV-associated mucinous (predominantly intestinal-type and invasive ECA resembling stratified mucin-producing intraepithelial lesion [iSMILE]) and usual-type carcinomas. HIK1083 was expressed in nearly half of gastric-type carcinomas, but not in the vast majority of other subtypes. GATA3 was positive in 10% of usual-type adenocarcinomas and in single examples of other subtypes. Rare gastric-type and HPVA mucinous carcinomas displayed HER2 overexpression. Androgen receptor was positive in 6% of usual-type adenocarcinomas. Aberrant p53 expression was found in only 3.6% of usual-type HPVA carcinomas, but it was more prevalent in mucinous (intestinal type and iSMILE) HPVAs and non-human papilloma virus-associates (particularly in gastric-type carcinoma, >50% of cases). The following diagnostic classification algorithms were developed with the above data. Carcinomas without overt cytoplasmic mucin (endometrioid, usual-type endocervical, clear cell, and mesonephric carcinomas) can be subclassified using HR-HPV ISH, ER, and GATA3, whereas carcinomas with easily appreciated cytoplasmic mucin (endometrioid carcinoma with mucinous features, HPVA mucinous, and gastric-type carcinomas) can be subclassified with HR-HPV ISH and ER.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations116
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207