MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133717709 · doi:10.1097/pgp.0000000000000764

International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification (IECC): An Independent Cohort With Clinical and Molecular Findings

2021· article· en· W3133717709 on OpenAlexaff
Hezhen Ren, Noorah Almadani, Jennifer Pors, Samuel Leung, Julie Ho, Christine Chow, Monica Ta, Kay J. Park, Simona Stolnicu, Robert A. Soslow, David G. Huntsman, Blake C. Gilks, Lynn Hoang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Pathology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdenocarcinomaPathologyCohortMedicineInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification (IECC) has reorganized the classification of endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs), separating them into human papilloma virus (HPV)-associated (HPVA) and HPVA independent (HPVI) categories. In this study, we sought to revalidate the IECC clinical findings in an independent cohort and assess the mutational differences between HPVA and HPVI ECAs using next generation sequencing. Consecutive cases of ECAs were reclassified under the IECC. Clinicopathologic information was collected and tissue was sent for targeted next-generation sequencing in 33 genes. Associations between HPV status, clinicopathologic parameters and mutation status, with survival were evaluated. The series comprised of 85/100 HPVA (63 HPVA-usual type, 4 villoglandular, 3 mucinous intestinal, 15 mucinous not otherwise specified) and 15/100 HPVI (9 gastric, 4 mesonephric, 1 clear cell, 1 not otherwise specified). HPVA ECAs presented at a lower age (P=0.001), smaller tumor sizes (P=0.011), less margin positivity (P=0.027), less Silva pattern C (P=0.002), and lower FIGO stages (P=0.020). HPVA had superior survival compared with HPVI ECA [overall survival (P=0.0026), disease-specific survival (P=0.0092), and progression-free survival (P=0.0041)]. Factors that correlated with worse prognosis irrespective of HPV status were FIGO stage, positive margins and lymphovascular invasion (P<0.05). TP53 mutations were detected in a significantly higher proportion of HPVIs than HPVAs (P<<0.001). The study revalidates the IECC system by reaffirming the clinical and prognostic differences between HPVA and HPVI ECAs in an independent dataset.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological PathologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207