Histotype and Grade Are of Prognostic Significance in the No Specific Molecular Profile Molecular Subtype of Endometrial Carcinoma But Not in POLEmut, MMRd, or p53abn Endometrial Carcinomas: Results From a 2478 Case Series and a Systematic Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Histotype and grade of endometrial carcinoma (EC) have been cornerstones of risk assessment, as both are known to be associated with differences in prognosis. The aim of this study was to analyze the prognostic significance of grade and histotype (comparing low-grade endometrioid, high-grade endometrioid, serous, and all others) within each EC molecular subtype, with further stratification by stage. A cohort of 2478 patients with EC were identified from our center. Disease-specific survival was compared for tumors of each molecular subtype after stratification of patients into 1 of 4 groups (low-grade endometrioid, high-grade endometrioid, serous, other). In addition, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify all previous studies where the prognostic significance of grade and histotype within molecular subtypes was reported. Grade and histotype were not of prognostic significance in POLE mut or p53abn EC across all stages and when just considering stage I ECs. MMRd low-grade ECs were associated with a better prognosis; however, they were also associated with lower stage disease, and within stage I tumors, grade and histotype were not of prognostic significance. Grade and histotype were of prognostic significance in NSMP ECs, in all stages and in the subset of stage I tumors ( P <0.001 for both analyses). On a systematic review of the literature, we identified 7 studies; there was no prognostic significance of grade and histotype (comparing low-grade endometrioid, high-grade endometrioid and serous) in POLE mut, and p53abn EC, and no prognostic significance of grade and histotype independent of stage in MMRd. Histotype and grade are strongly associated with prognosis in NSMP EC, but not in other molecular subtypes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".