MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094330820 · doi:10.4021/wjon236e

A Nasal Cavity Mucosal Melanoma Connected by Nasolacrimal Duct in a Patient with Multiple Co-morbidities: A Treatment Dilemma

2010· article· en· W2094330820 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ching-Feng Chou

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicInfectious Diseases and Mycology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNasal cavityMelanomaSurgeryRadiation therapyMucosal melanomaChemosisRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nasal cavity is a rare site in melanoma and surgery plays important roles in its treatment. A mucosal melanoma penetrating through the nasolacriminal duct (NLD) into orbit in a patient with multiple co-morbidities poses some difficulties in its management. A 78 year-old man developed epiphora and ocular swelling in recent 1 week in his left eye. He had medical histories of hypertension, diabetes, chronic renal insufficiency and right middle cerebral artery infarction. Physical examination revealed left periorbital swelling, chemosis, lateral gaze impairment and a dark-colored mass in left nasal cavity. Mucosal melanoma was diagnosed by biopsy. Contrast enhanced T1-weighted MRI showed an enlarged hyperdense lesion in left nasal cavity which invades through the NLD and gets into left medial aspect of orbit with involvement of preseptal space and retrobulbar fat. The patient was treated with radiation therapy alone (450 cGY in 13 fractions) with partial response. Lung metastasis occurred 3 months later and the patient was alive with disease for 6 more months.Primary surgical resection has been the treatment of choice for mucosal melanoma. Radiotherapy in our patient was chosen for multiple co-morbidities. Neither local nor regional control was improved by this approach. Palliative chemotherapy in this situation could be the treatment of choice for patient's better quality of life.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicInfectious Diseases and MycologyFrench-language works237,207