Hobnail hemangiomas (targetoid hemosiderotic hemangiomas) are true lymphangiomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hobnail hemangioma (targetoid hemosiderotic hemangioma) is a small benign vascular tumor of the superficial and mid-dermis. In contrast to its well-characterized histology, it has been unclear whether this tumor arises from blood vessel endothelial cells (BECs) or lymphatic vessel endothelial cells (LECs). METHODS: We analyzed 10 hobnail hemangiomas by immunohistochemistry, using the recently described lymphatic endothelial cell marker, D2-40. For comparison, CD31, CD34, and alpha-smooth muscle actin expression were studied in consecutive sections of the paraffin-embedded tissues. RESULTS: In all analyzed vessels, D2-40 labeled exclusively LECs, whereas BECs were consistently negative. In contrast to capillary BECs, either neighboring the tumors or intermingled, neoplastic endothelial cells of all 10 hobnail hemangiomas were strongly labeled by D2-40. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a lymphatic origin for hobnail hemangiomas. This view is further supported by the CD34 negativity of endothelial cells and the lack of actin-labeled pericytes in hobnail hemangiomas, both characteristic of lymphatic vessels. Moreover, our analysis revealed that microshunts between neoplastic lymphatic vascular channels and small blood vessels occur, explaining some features of hobnail hemangiomas, such as aneurysmatic microstructures, erythrocytes within and beneath neoplastic vascular spaces, inflammatory changes, scarring, and interstitial hemosiderin deposits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".