MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068918729 · doi:10.1016/j.prp.2005.03.008

Hybrid chromophobe renal cell neoplasm

2005· article· en· W2068918729 on OpenAlexaff
Prashant Dhamanaskar, Eric C. Bélanger, William A. Stinson

Bibliographic record

VenuePathology - Research and Practice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromophobe cellOncocytomaPathologyRenal oncocytomaCytokeratinImmunostainingRenal cell carcinomaStainingMedicineClear cellVimentinImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid renal cell neoplasms (HRCNs) containing areas of tumor cells displaying cytological features of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (CHRCC) and renal oncocytoma (RO) have been recently described in patients with renal oncocytosis and Birt-Hogg-Dube (BHD) syndrome (autosomal dominant genodermatosis). In this study, we identified cases of sporadic HRCN. We reviewed 425 consecutive renal cell carcinomas (RCC), 18 CHRCC, six HRCN, and 25 RO. Five HRCN were identified, including four from the group of RCC and two from RO. Patient age ranged from 40 to 68 years (mean age: 54 years), and the male:female ratio was 4:1. Tumors measured from 1.8 to 5 cm (mean diameter: 3.0 cm). Tumoral necrosis was not seen. Vascular invasion into medium-sized veins was identified in one HRCN. Chromophobe cells accounted for 20-80% of the tumors. Hale's colloidal stain showed weak to moderate diffuse cytoplasmic staining in scattered cells corresponding to those displaying routine staining features of chromophobe cells. Areas of oncocytic cells in studied tumors and control oncocytomas showed negative or focal cytoplasmic staining usually bordering extra- or intra-cytoplasmic lumina. Immunostaining for cytokeratin 7 and vimentin showed focal immunoreactivity in three cases and negative reactivity in all six cases, respectively. None of the study cases had microscopic RO, as commonly seen in renal oncocytosis, or were associated with BHD syndrome Sporadic HRCN accounted for 1% of RCC. They were of smaller size than RCC and were associated with a favorable prognosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations62
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathology - Research and PracticeSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207