MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406937015 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092006

Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of the microcystic elongated and fragmented pattern in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4406937015 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peng Jia, Baofeng Duan, Yan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking UniversityPeking University First Hospital
KeywordsMedicineEndometrial cancerMeta-analysisOncologyCancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The presence of the microcystic elongated and fragmented (MELF) pattern, distinguished by its microcystic, elongated and fragmented attributes, constitutes a common manifestation of myometrial invasion (MI) within endometrial carcinoma. However, the prognostic significance of this pattern has not been definitively established. Consequently, this research aimed to clarify the prognostic implications of the MELF pattern for individuals diagnosed with endometrial carcinoma. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational clinical studies. DATA SOURCES: An extensive review of the literature was conducted using reputable databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, covering the period from January 2003 to October 2023. Search terms encompassed endometrial cancer and the MELF pattern. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: The inclusion criteria were patients who had undergone hysterectomy and whose pathology confirmed endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, with or without MELF infiltration. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers performed data extraction separately. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Stata V.17.0 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The meta-analysis incorporated 16 retrospective cohort studies. Employing a fixed-effects approach, the analysis demonstrated an association of the MELF pattern with reduced overall survival (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.50-3.25, p=0.000) and lower disease-free survival rates among patients with endometrial cancer (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.55, p=0.006). Furthermore, aggregated data revealed a linkage between the MELF pattern and significant MI, nodal metastasis, involvement of the lymphovascular space, penetration of the cervical stroma and progression to advanced stages of endometrial carcinoma. CONCLUSION: The MELF pattern serves as a significant adverse prognostic factor in endometrial cancer, warranting increased attention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.030
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→