MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104671359 · doi:10.4021/jmc.v4i8.1455

Cluster Headache and Pituitary Prolactinoma

2013· article· en· W2104671359 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
B. Edvardsson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBromocriptineProlactinomaCluster headachePituitary apoplexySumatriptanPituitary adenomaMigraineMagnetic resonance imagingPituitary tumorsPediatricsSurgeryAdenomaRadiologyInternal medicineProlactin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cluster headache (CH) is a primary headache by definition not caused by any known underlying structural pathology. However, symptomatic cases have been described, for example, tumors, particularly pituitary adenomas, malformations, and infections/inflammations. The evaluation of CH is an issue unresolved. A 46-year-old man presented with a 5-month history of side-locked attacks of an excruciating stabbing and boring left-sided pain located in the orbit. He satisfied the revised International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for CH. His medical and family histories were unremarkable. A diagnosis of CH was made. The patient partially responded to symptomatic treatment. Owing to the relatively late onset of CH an enhanced magnetic resonance imaging was ordered to rule out an underlying lesion. It was performed after 1 month and displayed a pituitary adenoma. Evaluations revealed a prolactinoma. After treatment with bromocriptine, the headache attacks resolved completely. Although I cannot exclude an unintentional comorbidity, in my opinion, the co-occurrence of a prolactinoma with unilateral headache, in a hitherto headache-free man, points toward the fact that in this case the CH was caused or triggered by the prolactinoma. The headache attacks resolved completely after the bromocriptine treatment and the patient also remained headache free at the follow-up. The response of the headache to sumatriptan and other typical CH medications does not exclude a secondary form. Symptomatic CHs responsive to this therapy have been described. Associated cranial lesions such as tumours have been reported in CH patients and the attacks may be clinically indistinguishable from the primary form. Neuroimaging, preferably contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging should always be considered in patients with cluster headache despite normal neurological examination. Late-onset cluster headache represents a condition that requires careful evaluation. Prolactinoma can present as cluster headache. J Med Cases. 2013;4(8):523-525 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/jmc1379e

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207