MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986886111 · doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e31813c0e11

Divergent Myoid, Neuroendocrine, and Perineural Differentiation in a Nasal Tumor of a Patient With Carney Complex

2008· article· en· W1986886111 on OpenAlexaff
Linda N. Dao, Bernd W. Scheithauer, Robert A. Erlandson, William F. Young, J. Aidan Carney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac tumors and thrombi
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathologyDesminAnatomyEnolaseBiologyNeuroendocrine differentiationImmunohistochemistryMedicineVimentinCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 39-year-old woman with Carney complex presented with a stroke of undetermined etiology. Computed tomography showed bilateral thalamic infarctions and also an unsuspected multicompartmental cystic neoplasm that had eroded the anterior clivus and extended forward into the nasopharynx. Histologically, the mass appeared benign and was composed of spindle cells and multiple foci of striated muscle. Immunohistochemically, the spindle cells were strongly reactive for S-100 protein and to a lesser extent for CD57, collagen IV, neuron-specific enolase, smooth muscle actin, epithelial membrane antigen, and glut-1. The striated muscle cells were positive for desmin and myogenin. The MIB-1 labeling index was 0.5%. Ultrastructural examination was necessary to reveal the full extent of divergent differentiation. Ultrastructurally, the spindle cells showed divergent differentiation along several cell lines, including smooth muscle, neuroendocrine, hybrid smooth muscle-neuroendocrine, perineural-like cells, and striated muscle. The occurrence of this unique lesion in a patient with the Carney complex raises the possibility that it may be a rare component of the syndrome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicCardiac tumors and thrombiFrench-language works237,207