MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415099668 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.102719

Identifying high-risk relapse in early-stage I to II ovarian cancer using the CA125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM) score: a Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup individual patient-data meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4415099668 on OpenAlexaff
Pauline Corbaux, Benoît You, Tatsuo Kagimura, Rosalind Glasspool, Iain A. McNeish, Adrian Cook, Mansoor Raza Mirza, Kristina Lindemann, Anna V. Tinker, Stephen Welch, Isabelle Laure Ray-Coquard, Fabien Subtil, Olivier Colomban, Julien Péron, Eleni Karamouza, Caroline Kelly, Liz-Anne Lewsley, Xavier Paolettí, Nozomu Yanaihara

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1Hospices Civils de Lyon
KeywordsOvarian cancerAdjuvantGynecologic cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerEpithelial ovarian cancerAdjuvant therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Despite curative surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, a significant number of early stage I to II ovarian cancers relapse. The CA125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM) is a pragmatic indicator of tumor intrinsic chemosensitivity in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. We assessed the prognostic value of KELIM in patients with early-stage ovarian cancer, with respect to 5-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival, using the Meta-Analysis in Ovarian Cancer, which is the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup individual patient-data meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: Individual patient KELIM values were previously estimated in 5884 patients from the Meta-Analysis in Ovarian Cancer. The prognostic value of KELIM was assessed using univariable & multivariable analyses in patients with resected International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I and II disease. RESULTS: Overall, 1143 patients were identified, including clear cell (46.7%); serous (23.7%); endometrioid (12.4%); and mucinous carcinomas (3.9%). In multivariable analyses, a favorable KELIM score (≥1.0) was associated with higher 5-year recurrence-free survival (68.3% vs 55.9%; HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77) and 5-year overall survival (80.7% vs 72.8%; HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.68), as was the histological sub-type. In exploratory analyses, KELIM score was a prognostic factor regarding 5-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival across all sub-types (especially clear cell carcinoma and serous, with HR ranging from 0.45 to 0.63) with baseline CA125 ≥15 IU/L, except for mucinous histology. CONCLUSIONS: The pragmatic KELIM score is an independent prognostic factor in patients with a non-mucinous stage I to II ovarian cancer optimally resected and treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. KELIM may help identify the patients at higher risk of relapse and death requiring closer follow-up or treatment intensification.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.041
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological CancerSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207