Annual Cervical Cancer Screening Revealed Early Stage Clear Cell Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Cervix: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clear cell adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix (CCAC) is rare. We describe a case of CCAC, which was treated with complete resection without adjuvant therapy. The patient was a 42-year-old woman, who had no chief complaint. She had undergone annual cervical cancer screening, and no abnormalities had been detected in previous examinations. However, in a subsequent screening examination, cervical cytology produced negative results, but cervicovaginal erosion was observed at the uterine cervix. A detailed examination led to adenocarcinoma being suspected, and so conization was performed, resulting in a diagnosis of CCAC. A microscopic examination revealed atypical cells with clear-slightly basophilic cytoplasm, and immunohistochemical studies showed that they were positive for napsin A, p16, and AE1/3. Radical hysterectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection, and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were performed. Complete resection was achieved, and the postoperative diagnosis was CCAC, pT1b1N0M0, ly(-), v(-). The patient did not undergo adjuvant treatment. She is still alive and recurrence-free. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2019;8(1):21-24 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo530
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".