MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cutaneous mastocytosis with atypical mast cells and giant cytoplasmic granules

2012· article· en· W2053625220 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Lachapelle, Brenda Moroz, Văn Hùng Nguyễn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Pathology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMast cells and histamine
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathologyCutaneous MastocytosisGiant cellBiologyCD117TryptaseMast cellEosinophilicBiopsyImmunostainingStainingSystemic mastocytosisImmunohistochemistryMedicineImmunologyBone marrowCell biologyCD34

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 12-year-old male presented with an 8-year history of five firm cream colored papules on the right vertex of the scalp. A biopsy showed a dense infiltrate of monomorphous mast cells involving the dermis and extending into the subcutis. A relatively well-circumscribed cluster of larger cells showed pleomorphic nuclei with bilobed and multilobed morphology. Both mast cell populations had an eosinophilic cytoplasm filled with granules ranging in size from small to giant forms. By immunohistochemistry, the cells expressed CD117, tryptase and CD68, and were negative for AE1/AE3, CD1a, CD2 and CD25. S-100 staining revealed only faint cytoplasmic positivity and myeloperoxidase had an inhomogeneous patchy pattern, with an overall staining of less than 5% of the cells. A diagnosis of cutaneous mastocytosis was made and after 6 months follow-up, no progression observed. Clinical correlation and awareness of these unusual morphologic features as being part of the spectrum of cutaneous mastocytosis are important to avoid an erroneous diagnosis of malignancy. Although pleomorphic, multilobed nuclear morphology and giant cytoplasmic granules have not been associated with an aggressive behavior or systemic mastocytosis, close clinical observation is warranted in this context.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous PathologySame topicMast cells and histamineFrench-language works237,207