Questioning the Value of Evaluating Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors on Core Biopsy Specimens of Patients with Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the value of estrogen and progesterone receptors on core biopsy specimens of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Introduction: The immunohistochemical determination of the estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status is predictive of the response of patients with invasive cancer to hormonal therapy. The value of the receptor status prior to definitive surgery with either breast conservation or mastectomy for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and no invasive component is less clear. Methods: We identified through the tumor registry 344 patients with breast cancer diagnosed from 2014 through 2015. Two hundred seventy-seven patients had invasive cancer at diagnosis. Results: Of the remaining 67 patients with DCIS or atypical hyperplasia alone on core biopsy, 15 (22%) patients were found to have invasive cancer at the time of definitive surgery. Forty-six patients without an invasive component had definitive surgery at the study institution, of which three had a component of higher grade DCIS than on the core biopsy. Fourteen patients (30%) underwent a mastectomy. Conclusion: A significant proportion (29%) of patients with DCIS alone on core biopsy had either an invasive component at the time of definitive surgery or a higher grade DCIS component. An additional 14/46 (30%) of patients chose mastectomy, for whom consideration of adjuvant endocrine therapy for contralateral risk reduction did not depend on the receptor status of the index DCIS. Cost savings could be realized if the determination of ER is deferred until after definitive surgery. Determination of PR on DCIS specimens can be omitted entirely.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".