Advanced Colon Cancer Before the Age of 20 Years: A Case for Extension of the Current Colonscopy Surveillance Guidelines in Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) currently accounts for between 2% to 6% of all colorectal adenocarcinomas. Controversies exist regarding the current guidelines for colonoscopic screening for colon cancer. CASE REPORT: A case of colon cancer in a young Japanese man with a family history of colon cancer that did not meet the criteria for HNPCC is reported. A malignant pelvic mass discovered shortly before his 20th birthday prompted a colonoscopy. The findings at colonoscopy determined that the patient and his family fulfilled the criteria of HNPCC. CONCLUSION: Before finding a pelvic mass metastatic from adenocarcinoma of the ascending colon, this patient was clearly outside of the current guidelines for HNPCC screening. It is suggested that in similar patients, even if they do not fulfill all the criteria for HNPCC, it would be appropriate to consider screening well before the recommended lower age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".