Clinicopathological features of pulmonary mucinous adenocarcinoma: A descriptive analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mucinous adenocarcinoma is a rare subtype of lung cancer characterized by abnormal mucin production. We sought to investigate the clinical and pathological features of pulmonary mucinous adenocarcinomas and to identify prognostic factors. METHODS: This was a single-institution retrospective review of patients with pulmonary mucinous adenocarcinoma diagnosed between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2020. Descriptive analysis included demographics, diagnostic data, and treatment modalities. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included in the study. Median age was 65 years (range: 26-84), 30 (54%) were female, 48 (86%) had a smoking history, and 41 (73%) patients had ECOG performance status 0-1. Nearly half (26, 46%) were stage IV at presentation, while 11 (20%) presented as stage I, 10 (18%) stage II, and 9 (16%) stage III. Biomarker testing increased through the study period. Where performed, 4/48 (8%) cases were ALK positive, but there were no EGFR cases identified (0/36). Only 3/20 cases had PD-L1 expression >50%. Curative intent therapy was performed in 23 patients (17 had surgery +/- chemotherapy/radiation, 4 had radiotherapy alone, 2 had chemoradiation). Median OS in the entire population was 16.1 months (m). OS by stage was 50.0m for stage I, not reached for stage II, 20.7m for stage III, and 8.1m for stage IV. CONCLUSIONS: The overall prognosis of pulmonary mucinous adenocarcinoma appears similar to that of non-mucinous adenocarcinomas, with distinct differences noted in the incidence of oncogenic driver mutations, particularly an absence of EGFR mutations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".