MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lymphoepithelioma‐like carcinoma of the breast: lack of evidence of Epstein–Barr virus infection

2001· article· en· W2042542769 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistopathology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphoepithelioma-like carcinomaPathologyLymphoepitheliomaImmunohistochemistryMedullary carcinomaIn situ hybridizationEpstein–Barr virusVirusCarcinomaBiologyMedicineInternal medicineVirologyThyroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Six cases of lymphoepithelioma-like carcinomas of the breast were studied in order to better define the morphology of this type of breast tumour and to see if these neoplastic lesions are related to Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection by analogy with histologically similar tumours located in other organs. METHODS AND RESULTS: The cases were studied with immunohistochemistry using several antibodies and with in-situ hybridization method employing different types of nucleotides in four cases. The cases presented the distinctive morphology of the lymphoepithelioma-like carcinomas as seen in other organs. Specifically Rigaud and Schminke's patterns of growth were observed. In addition, at the edge of the neoplastic lesions, a lymphoepithelial lobulitis was seen. In-situ hybridization failed to reveal any positivity for EBV genome. CONCLUSION: Lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma is a specific type of breast tumour, but its relation to EBV has yet to be proven. The differential diagnosis with medullary carcinoma is discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.254 · 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