Benign Tumors of the Esophagus: A Histopathologic Study of 49 Cases among 931 Consecutive Esophageal Biopsies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author reviewed 931 consecutive esophageal biopsies in the last 15 year in out pathology laboratory of our hospital in search for benign esophageal tumors. As the results, 41 cases (4.4%) of squamous papilloma, 4 cases (0.4%) of granular cell tumor, 3 cases (0.3%) of leiomyoima, and 1 case (0.1%) tubular adenoma were identified. The 41 cases of squamous papillma were located in the cervical esophagus in 6 cases, in the proximal esophagus in 12 cases, in the middle esophagus in 11 cases, and in the distal esophagus in 12 cases. The squamous papilloma was immunohistochemically positive for various cytokeratins. It was endoscopically recognized as small polypoid tumor. The age ranged from 35 years to 81 years with a mean of 51 years. Male to female ratio was 25:16. The 4 cases of granular cell tumor were located in the proximal esophagus in 3 cases, and in the middle esophagus in 1 case. The granular cell tumor was immunohistochemically positive for vimentin, S100 protein, and neuron-specific enolase. It was endoscopically recognized by elevated small lesions. The ages of were 36, 45, 67 and 78 years, and male to female ratio was 1:3. The 1 case of tubular adenoma was located in the distal esophagus. Histologically, it was associated with heterotopic gastric mcusa, and immunohistochemically faintly positive for p53 protein and Ki-67 antigen. It was endoscopically a slightly elevated lesion. The patient was 46 year-old man. The 3 cases of leiomyoma were located in the cervical esophagus in 1 case and in the proximal esophagus in 2 cases. It was immunohistochemically positive for vimentin, α-smooth muscle actin, and desmin. It was endoscopically recognized as a submucosal tumor. The ages were 34, 45, and 85 years. Male to female ratio was 1:2.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".