Predictors of Malignancy in Patients With Indeterminate Biliary Strictures and Atypical Biliary Cytology: Results From Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atypical cellular features are commonly encountered in patients with indeterminate biliary strictures, which are nondiagnostic of malignancy yet cannot rule it out. This study aims to identify clinical features that could discriminate patients with indeterminate biliary strictures and atypical biliary cytology who may harbor underlying malignancy. METHODS: All patients with an indeterminate biliary stricture and an atypical brush cytology obtained during endoscopic brushings were identified in a large tertiary-care center. Demographical information, clinical data and the final pathological diagnosis were collected. The study cohort was divided based on the final diagnosis into benign and malignant groups. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 62.9% were males with mean age of 61.7 ± 16.4 years. Overall, there was an almost equal distribution of patients in the benign and malignant groups. Older age (≥65 years), jaundice, weight loss, intrahepatic biliary and pancreatic duct dilation, double-duct sign and presence of a mass were associated with malignancy in the univariate analysis. However, only older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to 1.03), jaundice (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.11 to 9.98) and presence of a mass (OR 12.10, 95% CI 4.94 to 29.67) were significantly associated with malignancy in the multivariate analysis. High CA19-9 was associated with malignancy only in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. CONCLUSION: In patients with indeterminate biliary stricture and atypical brush cytology, older age, jaundice and presence of a mass are significant predictors of malignancy. Patients with such characteristics need prompt evaluation to rule out underlying malignancy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".