Dupla drenagem para cadeias linfonodais distintas, detectada por técnica de biópsia de linfonodo sentinela em pacientes com melanoma cutâneo: relato de dois casos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Os principais méritos da biópsia de linfonodo sentinela em pacientes com melanoma cutâneo residem na possibilidade de serem evitadas linfadenectomias radicais desnecessárias e de permitir a correta identificação da cadeia de drenagem linfática, principalmente quando o tumor se localiza em áreas de drenagem ambígua. Atualmente já foi incorporada como fator prognóstico, sendo importante dado para o correto estadiamento do paciente. No presente relato são apresentados dois casos em que a utilização desta técnica foi extremamente útil, sobretudo por ter identificado a presença de drenagem linfática para duas cadeias linfáticas distintas. é importante que o dermatologista esteja consciente da correta indicação da técnica, para poder orientar da melhor forma possível seus pacientes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".