A Case of Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma with Clinical Benefit from FOLFOX and Bevacizumab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 44-year-old woman presented with lower abdominal pain and bilateral ovarian masses on ultrasound. Exploratory laparotomy revealed extensive peritoneal and intra-abdominal disease and an abnormal appendix. Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, infracolic omentectomy, ileocolic resection and primary anastomosis were performed. Final pathology revealed a primary appendiceal adenocarcinoma, poorly differentiated, of signet ring cell type. CT scan postoperatively revealed gross residual disease. The patient was treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab. Repeat CT scan showed a decrease in residual disease and the patient clinically improved. After her treatment has been continued for 13 months, she remains clinically well and her CT scan shows sustained disease stability. Disseminated appendiceal carcinoma is generally considered to be refractory to 5-FU-based chemotherapy and, to our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a patient with appendiceal adenocarcinoma demonstrating clinical benefit and sustained stability of disease with combination chemotherapy plus bevacizumab.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".