MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855177513 · doi:10.5858/2000-124-0609-hmciml

Hyperplastic Mesothelial Cells in Mediastinal Lymph Node Sinuses With Extranodal Lymphatic Involvement

2000· article· en· W1855177513 on OpenAlexaff
Phillip A. Isotalo, John P. Veinot, Maha Jabi

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesothelial CellPathologyLymphatic systemMedicineLymph nodeMesotheliumMesotheliomaCarcinomaLymphatic vesselLymphatic EndotheliumMetastasisCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a patient with hyperplastic mesothelial cells localized to mediastinal lymph node sinuses. These mesothelial cells were originally misdiagnosed as metastatic carcinoma, and the patient received radiotherapy. Histologic review, immunohistochemistry, and ultrastructural studies confirmed mesothelial cell origin. These nodal mesothelial cells were associated with pericardial and pleural effusions. Extranodal lymphatics also contained hyperplastic mesothelial cells, confirming their mode of lymphatic transport to node sinuses. This finding supports the theory that hyperplastic mesothelial cells derive from reactive serosal mesothelium and are dislodged into draining lymphatics. This is the first report, to our knowledge, that demonstrates the pathogenetic significance of this lymphatic transport mechanism. Awareness of intralymphatic and nodal benign hyperplastic mesothelial cells and their mimicry of invasive malignant neoplasms is important for accurate diagnoses and appropriate therapy.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory MedicineSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207