MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995468478 · doi:10.1188/14.onf.95-98

Second Malignancies in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

2013· article· en· W1995468478 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Streu

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic lymphocytic leukemiaLymphocytosisAsymptomaticRashBiopsyChlorambucilWhite blood cellLeukemiaComplete blood countLeukemia cutisDermatologyInternal medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 73-year-old patient named Mr. G was diagnosed with Rai stage 0 chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in 2007. The diagnosis was made incidentally by a routine complete blood count that reported lymphocytosis, and the diagnosis was confirmed by flow cytometry. His family history for cancer only included a sister previously diagnosed with melanoma. Because of his early stage, he was followed in clinic and remained asymptomatic for three years. He then presented with supraclavicular and bilateral axillary lymphadenopathy measuring 4-6 cm, a rising white blood cell count of 43,620 u/L, and hemoglobin and platelet count slightly less than normal (12 g/dl and 136,000 u/L, respectively). Mr. G was started on chlorambucil and, after two months of treatment, was held because of a generalized papular erythematous rash covering 40% of his back, chest, and arms. He was referred to dermatology for assessment, and biopsy confirmed the rash as leukemic infiltration of the skin. A second biopsy performed on a 2 cm lesion found incidentally behind his right ear was positive for basal cell carcinoma (BCC).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology nursing forumSame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207