Cyto‐histological correlations in primary, recurrent and metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma: The institut Curie's experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine diagnostic cytomorphologic features of rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) on fine-needle aspiration (FNA) material, the cytologic material and corresponding histologic slides of 180 tumors obtained from 109 patients were reviewed. Fifty eight (32.2%) tumors were primary, 34 (18.9%) recurrent, and 88 (48.9%) metastatic. A review of original cytology reports revealed that 176 of 180 (97.8%) tumors were either diagnosed accurately or as round cell sarcoma, while 3 (1.7%) were reported as suspicious. In one case (0.5%), the material was unsatisfactory. No false negative samples were seen. When FNA morphology was correlated with different histological subtypes, the alveolar subtype RMSs were more cellular than the nonalveolar ones (91.4% vs. 64.9%). Similarly, alveolar subtype RMSs compared with nonalveolar ones exhibited more rhabdomyoblastic cells (77.1% vs. 52.7%), alveolar structures (67.6% vs. 10.8%), giant, multinucleated cells (22.9% vs. 6.7%), mitotic figures (57.1% vs. 18.9%), and cyto-nuclear atypia (77.1% vs. 43.2%). Inversely, spindle-shaped cells were more frequently seen in nonalveolar versus alveolar RMSs (37.8% vs. 20.9%).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".