Rectal adenocarcinoma with oncocytic features: possible relationship with preoperative chemoradiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The introduction of preoperative chemoradiation into the treatment protocol of rectal adenocarcinomas has affected the microscopical morphology in subsequent resection specimens. The constellation of histopathological changes is varied and well documented. AIM: To describe oncocytic change in rectal cancers that have been treated with chemoradiation before surgery. METHODS: 7 of 54 patients with rectal cancer were identified with a history of chemoradiation, specifically directed to the rectal tumours in fractions of 4500-5000 cGy of radiation and 5-fluorouracil. The rectal tumours in five of these seven patients were composed of oncocytes that constituted 30-80% of the cancers. The patients were three men and two women aged 65-73 years, all with T3 N0 tumours. The intervals between chemoradiation and resection varied from 3 to 12 weeks. RESULTS: The tumour cells conformed to oncocytes morphologically (large size with abundant, granular eosinophilic cytoplasm, vesicular nuclei and prominent acidophilic nucleoli), immunohistochemically (positive for carcinoembryonic antigen, cytokeratin 20 and caudal type homeo box transcription factor 2, but negative for both chromogranin and synaptophysin) and ultrastructurally (large cells showing tight junctions, cytoplasmic engorgement by mitochondria and absence of neurosecretory granules). CONCLUSIONS: The changes in these cells differ from those described previously in endocrine cells encountered in pretreated rectal cancers. Oncocytic change in this particular clinical context occurs as a reflection of cytotoxic damage or cellular hypoxia induced by chemoradiation resulting in degeneration of the cell and the oncocytic phenotype. Oncocytic change may be an under-recognised histopathological change in rectal cancers receiving preoperative chemoradiation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".