MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cellular neurothekeoma with a plexiform morphology: a case report with a discussion of the plexiform lesions of the skin

2006· article· en· W2033611116 on OpenAlexaff
Hisham Alkhalidi, Danny Ghazarian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Pathology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathologyLesionCD34ImmunohistochemistryHistogenesisDifferential diagnosisBiologyAnatomyMedicineStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurothekeoma is a rare benign dermal lesion that is commonly seen in children and teenagers. Despite its name, the true nature of this lesion is uncertain and controversial, particularly after the emergence of the cellular (spindle/epithelioid) variant. We describe the histological and immunohistochemical findings of a right thigh skin lesion in an 11-year-old girl. It consists of a dermal ill-defined plexiform mass composed of nests and fascicles of spindle cells with pale eosinophilic cytoplasm that lie within a sclerotic stroma. The immunohistochemistry shows diffuse reactivity to CD68, matrix metalloproteinase-II, CD10 and PGP9.5 with focal reactivity to CD57 and CD34. The lesion is negative for S100, factor XIIIa, smooth muscle markers and melanocytic markers. The features are compatible with a cellular variant of neurothekeoma with plexiform pattern that also exhibits an unusual pattern of fibrohistiocytic phenotype. Although such a lesion is benign, it has a wide but important differential diagnoses that are reviewed briefly together with a brief discussion about the origin of this rare entity.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous PathologySame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207