Multicentricity and the Risk of Recurrence/Persistence After Laser Vaporization for High-Grade Vulvar and Vaginal Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of the study was to assess the effect of multicentricity on the recurrence/persistence of high-grade vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) and vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) after laser vaporization. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients diagnosed with high-grade VIN/VAIN, who had undergone laser vaporization between 1997 and 2014. Recurrence/persistence rates and factors affecting recurrence/persistence were analyzed, and a life table analysis of recurrence-free intervals was conducted. Results: Among the 65 patients, the recurrence/persistence rate following laser vaporization was 22.3 per 100 person-years, with a median time to recurrence/persistence of 31.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.0 - 71.9 months). Patients with multicentricity and unicentricity had a recurrence/persistence rate of 49.1 per 100 person-years, with a median time to recurrence/persistence of 11.4 months, and 7.4 per 100 person-years, with a median time to recurrence/persistence of 96.5 months, respectively (P = 0.0002). The difference in recurrence-free survival between the multicentricity and unicentricity groups was significant (P = 0.00035). Patients with multicentricity had a 4.7-fold higher risk of recurrence/persistence (hazard ratio (HR): 4.71, 95% CI: 1.87 - 11.88, P = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that multicentricity was an independent risk factor for recurrence/persistence (odds ratio (OR): 4.16, 95% CI: 1.56 - 11.06, P = 0.004). Conclusions: Treatment of multicentric, high-grade VIN/VAIN with laser vaporization is strongly associated with treatment failure, with approximately half of patients experiencing recurrence/persistence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".