A proliferating composite adnexal tumour of the penis: report of the first case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cutaneous adnexal tumours are largely benign lesions, and are typically classified according to their state of appendageal differentiation as eccrine, apocrine, follicular and sebaceous.1,2 However, rare tumours may display a mixture of eccrine, follicular, sebaceous and apocrine differentiation. Such tumours with varied differentiation are relatively rare.3–9 The term “combined adnexal tumours of the skin” was proposed by Apisarnthanarax et al .3 Other synonyms include “benign adnexal tumour with multi-directional differentiation”8 and “benign adnexal tumour of mixed lineage”.1 Clinically, these tumours present as solitary, slowly enlarging dermal or subcutaneous nodules located in the head and neck and in the extremities.1,8 Histologically, they are characterised by well-circumscribed, non-encapsulated nodules composed of a lobular proliferation of epithelial cells displaying a spectrum of eccrine, apocrine, sebaceous and follicular differentiation. We describe a composite adnexal tumour arising in the ventral aspect of the penis, differentiating into follicular and sweat ductal structures. A 40-year-old man presented with an asymptomatic mass over the ventral aspect of the penis that had enlarged over a period of 5 years to a maximum size of 1.5 cm. The mass was excised and sent for histopathological examination. Low-power examination revealed epithelial hyperplasia with hyperkeratosis of the surface epithelium. A relatively well-circumscribed unencapsulated large nodular lesion was seen arising from the epidermis and extending downwards. The lesion was composed of partially solid and partially cystic …
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".