Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The following articles represent the next special section in a continuing series of special sections or special issues entitled “Insights and Controversies in Pathology.” Each special section consists of a group of articles providing the most current knowledge, recent advances, and areas of controversy for a subspeciality field in pathology.This special section focuses on serosal pathology. Françoise Galateau-Salle, MD, PhD, and Allen Gibbs, MBChB, FRCPath, served as guest editors and invited authors to submit their work focusing on different aspects of serosal pathology.Sisko Anttila, MD, PhD, focuses on “Epithelioid Lesions of the Serosa.” In her article, she reviews the epithelial/epithelioid lesions of the pleura, and discusses the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma versus metastasis, including immunohistochemical markers. She also focuses on the more problematic area of malignant versus benign proliferations of the mesothelial cells. Finally, she discusses some of the rare epithelioid lesions of the pleura and peritoneum.Pier-Giacomo Betta, MD, and colleagues provide a comprehensive overview on “Immunohistochemistry and Molecular Diagnostics of Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma.” This article not only assists in selecting which protein markers to use in difficult mesothelioma cases in daily practice, but also provides some insight into genetics and proteomics of these malignant tumors.Despite the ban on asbestos in many countries, in others, such as India, asbestos exposure is still common in several places, especially in ship salvaging, such as in the port of Mumbai. And even in industrialized countries, the story seems to be never ending, as illustrated by the debate in Canada about reopening of asbestos mines.In the last decade an increase of mesothelioma cases appeared in our daily practice for which no asbestos exposure can be proven, creating new challenges in asbestos litigation. Bharat Jasani, PhD, MBChB, FRCPath, and Allen Gibbs, MBChB, FRCPath, provide us with new information about “Mesothelioma Not Associated With Asbestos Exposure.” This article assists in understanding what other mechanisms might underlie the development of these malignant tumors. In addition, this article highlights important information for the litigation setting.Although primary lymphoproliferative conditions of the pleura are uncommon, they usually give rise to many difficult diagnostic problems. The article by Richard Attanoos, MD, MBBS, FRCPath, sheds some light on these rarely seen entities and provides clues on how to properly diagnose them.Finally, Didier Jean, PhD, et al discuss “Molecular Changes in Mesothelioma With an Impact on Prognosis and Treatment.” Despite many investigations dealing with genetics, proteomics, and posttranslational modifications, we still have not identified targets for improved treatment of these malignancies, and only a few biomarkers have been introduced as prognostic factors. The authors have reviewed the current literature and provide an extensive overview of investigations in this field. Many of these studies are controversial. The major problem in most studies is that genetic alterations in mesotheliomas have not been investigated as driver versus bystander mutations/alterations. It is our hope that, in the near future, further investigations might identify driver genes, which subsequently might be targeted by new drugs. Recently, a gene (BAP1) has been identified in familial mesothelioma and in another investigation was also found in sporadic mesotheliomas. This might give rise to new hope in this deadly disease.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,401 | 0,291 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».