MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2117532460 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.988

Isolated cervical lymph node metastasis of renal pelvic squamous cell carcinoma: A case report

2013· article· en· W2117532460 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jumpei Nakadai, Hiroki Ide, Yosuke Hirasawa, Yujiro Ito, Yasumitsu Uchida, Takeshi Masuda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymph nodeMetastasisRenal pelvisCervical lymph nodesPathologicalLymphRadiologyRenal cell carcinomaKidneyPathologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 78-year-old man was admitted to the Department of Otolaryngology of our hospital with bilateral lymph node swelling of the neck. Pathological examination revealed squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). He underwent computed tomography (CT) of the neck and chest, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and laryngoscopy to locate a primary tumour, however, no obvious tumour was detected. Eight months later, a renal tumour without regional lymph node swelling was found when a chest CT scan was performed again. We then performed a right nephroureterectomy and regional lymphadenectomy. Pathological examination revealed SCC of the renal pelvis, pT3, grade 3, without regional lymph node metastasis. This pathological finding for the kidney was virtually the same as that for cervical lymph nodes. Therefore, it was thought that his cervical tumours had metastasized from the renal pelvic SCC. To the best of our knowledge, there are no reports of renal pelvic carcinoma without regional lymph node metastasis having only cervical lymph node metastasis. This is the first case of isolated cervical lymph node metastasis from renal pelvic SCC.

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)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→