MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412721399 · doi:10.1002/ueg2.70074

The Brescia International Multidisciplinary Consensus Guidelines on the Optimal Pathology Assessment and Multidisciplinary Pathways of Non‐Pancreatic Neoplasms in and Around the Ampulla of Vater (PERIPAN)

2025· article· en· W4412721399 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Abu Hilal, Bas A. Uijterwijk, Daniël H. L. Lemmers, Boris V. Janssen, Marc G. Besselink, Denise Bianchi, Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta, Noriyoshi Fukushima, Anthony J. Gill, Seung‐Mo Hong, Alyssa M. Krasinskas, Claudio Luchini, Laura Melocchi, Giulio Rossi, Aldo Scarpa, Olca Baştürk, Deyali Chatterjee, Angela Chou, Iréne Esposito, Roger Feakins, Bas Groot Koerkamp, Ralph H. Hruban, Stefano La Rosa, Chanjuan Shi, Aatur D. Singhi, Joanne Verheij, Huamin Wang, Sergio Alfieri, Fabio Ausania, Adnan Alseidi, Marco J. Bruno, Ugo Boggi, Claudio Bnà, Dervenis Christos, Massimo Falconi, Michele Ghidini, Jakob W. Kist, Giovanni Marchegiani, Michèle Milella, Roberto Salvia, Ajith K. Siriwardena, H. Wilmink, Alberto Zaniboni, Shaimaa Al‐Janabi, Maia Blomhoff Holm, Eva Roos, Naoki Sano, In Hye Song, Zeynep Tarcan, Gianpaolo Balzano, Isabella Frigerio, Alfredo Guglielmi, Giuseppe Malleo, Horacio J. Asbun, Volkan Adsay, Caroline S. Verbeke

Bibliographic record

VenueUnited European Gastroenterology Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsPancreas Centre (Canada)
FundersAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachAmpulla of VaterAmpullaGeneral surgeryWorkflowCommon bile ductMedical physicsMultidisciplinary teamRadiologyPathologyInternal medicineCarcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: The lack of multidisciplinary workflow guidelines and clear definitions and classifications for neoplasms in and around the ampulla of Vater results in inconsistencies affecting patient care and research. OBJECTIVE: The PERIPAN international multidisciplinary consensus group aimed to standardize the multidisciplinary diagnostic workflow and achieve consensus on definitions and classifications in order to ensure proper classification and optimal diagnostic assessment and consequently to improve patient care and future research. DESIGN: An international team of 43 experts (pathologists, surgeons, radiologists, gastroenterologists, oncologists) from 12 countries identified knowledge gaps, reviewed 37061 articles, and proposed recommendations using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology (SIGN), including the Delphi methodology and the AGREEII tool for quality assessment and external validation. RESULTS: The 38 consensus questions and 51 recommendations provide guidance on the following key aspects: I. More specific anatomic criteria for the definition of what qualifies as "ampullary" neoplasms, their distinction from duodenal and common bile duct tumors, and clinicopathologic characteristics of anatomic subsets; II. Avoidance of the confusing term "periampullary" for final classification; III. Refined definitions of intestinal, pancreatobiliary and mixed subtypes, and introduction of rare histologic subtypes; IV. The use and limitations of immunohistochemical and molecular profiling; V. Biopsy acquisition; VI. Clinical information required for accurate pathology assessment of biopsies and ampullectomy specimens; VII. Key items to be included in pathology reports of endoscopic specimens. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Recognition of the Brescia PERIPAN guidelines will allow a more accurate classification of true ampullary cancers and their differentiation from other "periampullary" tumors. This will have significant implications for endoscopic interpretation and management, staging, pathologic diagnosis and therapeutic evaluation as well as oncologic treatment of various anatomic and histologic subsets of ampullary tumors. This will enhance the quality of both clinical care and future research in this complex medical field.

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)0.003
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnited European Gastroenterology JournalSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207