MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990486747 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2014-204592

Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome resulting from repeat bortezomib usage

2014· article· en· W1990486747 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy Nixon, Ken Kuljit S. Parhar

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological Complications and Syndromes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBortezomibMedicinePosterior reversible encephalopathy syndromeMultiple myelomaEncephalopathyComplicationLymphomaInternal medicinePathologyGastroenterologyMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bortezomib is a chemotherapeutic agent that acts via proteasome inhibition resulting in cellular apoptosis and inhibition of angiogenesis. Although widely accepted as treatment of multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, it has also been shown to be efficacious in a variety of solid tumours such as pancreatic and colonic. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a neuroradiological syndrome characterised by vasogenic oedema involving the postero-occipital cortical and subcortical white matter resulting in visual disturbances, seizures and altered mental status. Although in most cases PRES is reversible with removal of the provoking condition or drug, if not appropriately recognised and treated it may lead to permanent and life-threatening sequelae such as intracerebral haemorrhage and ischaemic infarction. We report a case of PRES associated with bortezomib therapy and contrast it with four other previously reported cases. Recognition of this potentially severe neurological complication is important with the increasingly widespread use of bortezomib.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicNeurological Complications and SyndromesFrench-language works237,207