Intravascular lymphocytosis in acute appendicitis: potential mimicry of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Intravascular lymphocytosis (IVL) in appendectomy specimens is a fairly common phenomenon but has not been described and studied in detail. The aim was to describe the IVL phenomenon in appendiceal specimens removed for appendicitis that can mimic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and to investigate factors that could contribute to the development of IVL. METHODS AND RESULTS: The clinicopathology of 100 appendectomy cases and the appendices from 20 right hemicolectomy cases were reviewed. The IVL phenomenon was more commonly seen in laparoscopic appendectomy specimens [Fisher's exact 0.011, odds ratio (OR) 3.14] and in patients <38 years old (Fisher's exact 0.012, OR 3.01). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical manipulation and the patient's innate immunity are contributary factors to the development of the IVL phenomenon. Pathologists should be aware of this histological artefact in order to prevent overdiagnosis of intravascular lymphoid neoplasia.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".