MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396685750 · doi:10.14740/wjon1845

Epidemiology of Adenosquamous Carcinomas

2024· article· en· W4396685750 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew G.K. Benesch, Vicente Ramos‐Santillan, Colin J. Rog, Erek Nelson, Kazuaki Takabe

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthRoswell Park Cancer InstituteU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicineAdenosquamous carcinomaEpidemiologyOncologyRadiation therapyStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineCancerAdenocarcinomaChemotherapyAnal cancerPathologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Adenosquamous carcinomas (ASCs) are a very rare histology containing cancer cells with both glandular-like (adeno) and squamous cell histologies, comprising typically a fraction of a percent of all solid tumors. The bulk of the literature on ASCs is comprised of case reports and small series, with the general finding that ASCs tend to have worse outcomes than either of their parent histologies. However, there is a lack of pan site-comparative studies in the literature that compare ASC clinicodemographic and survival outcomes with those of conventional adenocarcinomas (ACs) and squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs). Methods: In this study, we summarize these outcomes in eight primary sites, comprising 92.7% of all ASC cases diagnosed from 1975 to 2020 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Results: Lung ASCs comprise 51.5% of all ASC cases, accounting for 1.1% of all lung cancer cases, followed by uterine/cervical cancers at 29.7% of all ASC cases, translating into 1.8% of all cancers in this site. In descending order, the remaining 20% of ASCs arise in pancreatic, oral cavity, biliary, esophageal, colorectal, and gastric sites, comprising between 0.1% and 0.7% of all cancers in these sites. Apart from pancreatic and oral cavity cancers, ASC tumors tended to favor higher rates of regional or distant disease at presentation with poor tumor differentiation compared to either AC or SCC histologies. After multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, sex, detection stage, grade differentiation, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, except for oral cavity cancers, ASCs tended to have worse overall survivals compared to ACs (hazard ratios: 1.1 - 1.6) and SCC (1.0 - 1.3), with colorectal ASCs having the worse overall survival compared to colorectal ACs, with a hazard ratio of 1.4 (95% confidence interval: 1.3 - 1.6). Conclusions: Overall, these results suggest that ASC outcomes are site specific, and in general, tend to have worse outcomes than nonvariant ACs and SCCs even after correction for common clinical and epidemiological factors. These cancers have a poorly understood but unique tumor biology that warrants further characterization.

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)0.000
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 score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicColorectal and Anal CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207