Cystic clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: is it related to multilocular clear cell cystic neoplasm of low malignant potential?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We report the morphological spectrum of nine cystic clear cell papillary renal cell carcinomas (CCP-RCC). METHODS AND RESULTS: Mean tumour size was 2.1 cm and the stage was pT1a in all cases. The original diagnosis was multilocular clear cell cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential (MCCN-LMP) in five and CCP-RCC in four patients. All examples were composed of variably sized cysts lined by one layer of clear cells. Two tumours were exclusively cystic, seven showed tubular formation in the septae and five in which the tubular growth was compact and pseudo-solid. Two tumours had foci of nests and single cells showing similarities to the cellular areas of MCCN-LMP. The tubular/pseudo-solid/nested/single-cells foci formed microscopic nodules with a mean size of 1.8 mm. Three tumours had intracystic micropapillary formation. Cells were of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades 1-2/4. In all cases, the neoplastic nuclei were aligned away from the basement membranes at least focally. Tumours were positive for paired box gene 8 (PAX8), carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX), cytokeratin (CK)7 and CK34BE12 and negative for CD10. CONCLUSIONS: Cystic CCP-RCC is a pattern that should be recognized, as it shows overlapping morphological features with both multilocular cyst and MCCN-LMP. This series raises the question of whether some reported MCCN-LMPs are actually cystic CCP-RCC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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 teacher head, 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".