MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1927233674 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.606

Clear cell myomelanocytic tumour: minimally invasive treatment of a rare bladder tumour

2013· article· en· W1927233674 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael L. Pianezza, Jack Slatnik, Howard Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberous Sclerosis Complex Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaRoyal Alexandra Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyCystoscopyGenitourinary systemPathologicalProstateUrinary bladderUrinary systemPathologyRare diseaseImmunohistochemistryDiseaseUrologyBladder cancerInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clear cell myomelanocytic tumours are extremely rare neoplastic growths considered to be members of the family of perivascular epithelioid cell tumours (PEComas), which have in common the coexpression of melanocytic and smooth muscle immunohistochemical markers. These tumours are known to be ubiquitous with uncertain tumour biology and to have unpredictable clinical behaviour. They have been reported in the genitourinary tract, including the kidney and prostate. There are only 3 reported cases of clear cell myomelanocytic tumours originating in the urinary bladder. We report a case of a 24-year-old woman with chronic pelvic pain who underwent laparoscopic partial cystectomy and total excision of a bladder mass. Pathological examination revealed primary PEComa of the urinary bladder. Subsequent follow-up procedures, including cystoscopy and imaging, have not revealed any evidence of disease recurrence. The patient remains clinically free of disease 3 months after surgery.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicTuberous Sclerosis Complex ResearchFrench-language works237,207