Primary testicular mucinous neoplasms: case report and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testicular epithelial mucinous tumours are an extremely rare, but interesting form of testicular neoplasm. We reviewed the medical literature using PubMed search terms: testis, mucinous cystadenoma, mucinous cystadenocarcinoma, neoplasms and testicular neoplasms. We describe a case from our institution and provide a review of the literature. Only 11 previously reported cases of mucinous testicular tumours have been reported in the English literature. The natural history of these tumours is poorly understood, due to their rarity, but it appears that, like their ovarian counterparts, they have an excellent prognosis. Exclusion of metastasis is an important point for the urologist when encountering a mucinous testicular tumour, as metastatic cystic lesions may mimic a primary mucinous tumour. We describe a case of ossified testicular mucinous tumour of low malignant potential. Such tumours are common in the ovary, but arise very rarely in the testicle. The clinical and histological features of this tumour are presented, and previously reported cases are reviewed to highlight important clinical features.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".