MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cutaneous myoepithelioma arising within hidradenoma of the scalp

2011· review· en· W2041524146 on OpenAlexaff
Kiran Jakate, Kevin Wong, Jane Sirbovan, Wedad Hanna

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Pathology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer and Skin Lesions
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyoepithelial cellCytokeratinPathologyMyoepitheliomaImmunohistochemistryStromaCuboidal CellHistogenesisAnatomyHidradenomaBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 62-year-old man presented with a 2-year history of a 2-cm cystic mass involving his occiput. There had been recent enlargement, and the clinical impression was that of a pilar cyst. Histopathological sections showed a partially dermal solid and cystic proliferation. The tumor contained areas of glandular differentiation with cuboidal to columnar cells lining luminal and cystic spaces. A concurrent spindle cell proliferation was seen interspersed between glands and also formed broad, cellular sheets of cells. The stroma was sclerotic and without chondroid or myxoid elements. Immunohistochemistry showed that the spindled cells expressed S100 protein, cytokeratin and smooth muscle myosin. The immunohistochemical profile and the relationship with ductal elements supported myoepithelial differentiation. The proliferation warranted the diagnosis of myoepithelioma arising from a hidradenoma, which to our knowledge has not been previously described. In addition to discussing this case, we provide a brief review of epithelial-myoepithelial neoplasms encountered in the skin.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous PathologySame topicCancer and Skin LesionsFrench-language works237,207