Associations Between Intraluminal Tumor Cell Involvement in Serially Examined Fallopian Tubes and Endometrial Carcinoma Characteristics and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 12% of routinely examined fallopian tubes of endometrial carcinoma (EC) cases have intraluminal tumor cells (ILTCs). ILTC associations with EC characteristics and outcomes are understudied, and unknown in serially examined and embedded tubal fimbriae. Glass slides of serially examined and embedded tubal fimbriae for 371 EC cases were independently reviewed by 2 pathologists who recorded ILTC presence and characterized them as mucosal if involved and floating if not. Disagreements were reviewed by a third pathologist, and agreement between any 2 determined final ILTC status. Clinico-pathologic associations and ILTC presence were tested for significance ( P <0.05) by univariable analysis, and stage and histotype determinants were included in a multivariable analysis. The Kaplan-Meier estimates and log-rank tests compared overall and EC-specific survival, and Cox proportional regression estimated hazard ratios. ILTCs were present in 56 (15.1%) cases: 30 mucosal and 26 floating. FIGO stage 3/4, lymph-vascular space invasion, deep myometrial invasion, nonendometrioid histotype, and adjunctive chemotherapy were significantly associated with ILTC presence, and only stage was significant in the multivariable analysis. Overall, 61 women died: 30 of whom died of EC. ILTCs were nonsignificantly associated with higher overall and EC-specific mortality and mucosal ILTCs had the highest hazard ratios (1.64 and 1.89, respectively). Serially examined and embedded tubal fimbriae have a higher prevalence of ILTCs than routinely examined tubes, and high FIGO stage is an independent determinant. A prognostic effect was not found, but the higher trending hazard ratios suggest additional study is needed to determine whether ILTCs and in particular mucosal ILTCs adversely affect prognosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".