Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pheochromocytomas rarely produce dopamine as the only catecholamine. Two cases are reported here, and a review of the literature was conducted. Unlike norepinephrine-and epinephrine-secreting tumors, dopamine-secreting pheochromocytomas lack a classic clinical presentation and are often asymptomatic. Urinary and serum metabolites cannot be relied on to make the diagnosis, and serum or urine dopamine levels (or both) must be measured when dealing with a potential pheochromocytoma. Dopamine-secreting tumors are less likely to enhance with metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scanning and may benefit from the use of positron emission tomography. Treatment is en bloc surgical excision; but unlike other pheochromocytomas, alpha-blockade is not indicated as it may lead to hypotension and cardiovascular collapse. Metyrosine is a medication that can be useful for preoperative control of symptoms from these tumors. The function of metyrosine is to block dopamine synthesis; it has no alpha-blocking effect. This medication is an option for controlling symptoms but should not be used routinely in these patients. The prognosis for patients with these tumors is worse than for those with an epinephrine- and norepinephrine-secreting tumor. Because of their asymptomatic nature, dopamine-secreting pheochromocytomas tend to be detected later and are more likely to be malignant at the time of diagnosis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".