Primary de novo malignant giant cell tumor of kidney: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoclast-like giant cell tumors are usually observed in osseous tissue or as tumors of tendon sheath, characterized by the presence of multinucleated giant cells and mononuclear stromal cells. It has been reported in various extraosseous sites including breast, skin, soft tissue, salivary glands, lung, pancreas, female genital tract, thyroid, larynx and heart. However, extraosseous occurrence of such giant cell tumors in the kidney is extremely rare and is usually found in combination with a conventional malignancy. De-novo primary malignant giant cell tumors of the kidney are unusual lesions and to our knowledge this is the second such case. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a rare case of extraosseous primary denovo malignant giant cell tumor of the renal parenchyma in a 39-year-old Caucasian female to determine the histogenesis of this neoplasm with a detailed literature review. CONCLUSION: Primary denovo malignant giant cell tumor of the kidney is extremely rare. The cellular origin of this tumor is favored to be a pluripotential mesenchymal stromal cell of the mononuclear/phagocytic cellular lineage. Awareness of this neoplasm is important in the pathological interpretation of unusual findings at either fine needle aspiration or frozen section of solid renal masses.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".