MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1823750015 · doi:10.1093/ppr/114.1.s104

Primary Cutaneous B-Cell Lymphoma and Lymphoproliferative Disorders of Skin

2000· review· en· W1823750015 on OpenAlexaff
Samih Salama

Bibliographic record

VenuePathology Patterns Reviews · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous lymphoproliferative disorders research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphomaLymphoproliferative disordersPathologyMedicineMarginal zoneFollicular lymphomaPlasmacytomaLymphoid hyperplasiaMantle cell lymphomaLarge cellCutaneous lymphomaAnaplastic large-cell lymphomaMantle zoneB cellImmunologyMultiple myelomaAntibodyMycosis fungoidesGerminal centerInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cutaneous B-cell lymphomas (CBCLs) are rare and are usually secondary to systemic nodal lymphoma. These lymphomas account for about 20% of all cutaneous lymphomas. Only recently has the existence of B-cell lymphoma presenting clinically in the skin without evidence of extracutaneous involvement been accepted as primary CBCL. The application of immunohistochemistry and molecular analysis has shown that some cases of cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia and pseudolymphomas contain a monoclonal population of B cells and are therefore considered true lymphomas. The pathology and classification of this heterogeneous group of lymphoproliferative disorders is reviewed. The main entities comprise marginal zone lymphoma, lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma (immunocytoma), follicular center cell lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, large cell lymphoma (immunoblastic and anaplastic), intravascular lymphomatosis, plasmacytoma, and lymphoblastic lymphoma.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.010

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathology Patterns ReviewsSame topicCutaneous lymphoproliferative disorders researchFrench-language works237,207