The newly proposed International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification and its relevance to cervical cytology screening assessed in a prospective 2‐year study of 118 cases
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is generally acknowledged that interobserver variability for the histological diagnosis of endocervical adenocarcinoma (EA) subtypes is suboptimal. The recently proposed International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification (IECC) system is based on the presence of associated human papilloma virus (HPV) infection. It recognises HPV-associated EAs and non-HPV-associated EAs. METHODS: This prospective cytology-histology and molecular genetics-based study investigated the potential effect of IECC being applied to Papanicolaou (Pap) test with regard to the diagnostic accuracy of severe glandular lesions reported at least as adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS). RESULTS: Out of 118 liquid-based cytology Pap tests with AIS+ lesion, complete information on follow-up biopsy and HPV status was available in 51 cases. AIS and EA category correlated with histologically confirmed AIS/EA in 88.5% (23/26) and 70.5% (12/17) of cases, respectively. Interestingly, 93% (40/43) of cases diagnosed as AIS/EA were HPV positive and 7% (3/43) were HPV negative (originating in the cervix, endometrium and adnexa). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that this approach could possibly divide Pap tests containing severe glandular lesion into two groups: (a) robust diagnosis of HPV-associated EA and (b) non-HPV associated glandular lesions of heterogeneous origin, requiring further clinical preoperative diagnostic workup.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it