Fine‐needle aspiration in liposarcoma: Cytohistologic correlative study including well‐differentiated, myxoid, and pleomorphic variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have reviewed cytopathology and the corresponding histopathology material of 86 liposarcomas (55 patients) seen at Institut Curie. The liposarcomas (LS) were well differentiated in 14 cases (9 pure, 2 dedifferentiated, 3 sclerosing), 64 myxoid, and 8 pleomorphic. Twenty-four tumors were primary, 34 recurrent, and 28 secondary. Smears in LS were composed in different proportions of round, spindle cells, lipoblasts, and myxoid and vascular arborizing structures. Pure well-differentiated LS were frequently composed of lipoblasts, and round or spindle cells were occasionally seen. Dedifferentiated and sclerosing liposarcomas were composed of spindle or round cells, but lipoblasts were also occasionally present. Myxoid or vascular arborizing structures were absent. Myxoid LS (including round and spindle cell LS) frequently showed a myxoid background and less frequently vascular arborizing structures. Tumor cells were round or spindle. Lipoblasts were also seen. Pleomorphic LS were composed of an admixture of all cellular and stromal elements. Well-differentiated LS should be distinguished from hibernoma and spindle cell lipoma, and myxoid LS from myxoma, myxoid chondrosarcoma, chordoma, myxoid leiomyosarcoma, and myxoid malignant fibrous histiocytoma. The demonstration of the specific translocation t(12;16)(q13;p11) of myxoid LS is very helpful to establish the diagnosis. Pleomorphic LS should be differentiated from other high-grade sarcomas, whenever possible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".