MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128775709

Primary Signet-Ring Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder in an Atomic Bomb Survivor: A Case Report

2013· article· en· W2128775709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaori Yamashita, Fumio Ito, Hayakazu Nakazawa

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Nephrology and Urology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary and Genital Oncology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSignet ring cellSignet ring cell carcinomaUrinary bladderUrologyPopulationAsymptomaticBladder cancerCystoscopyPathologyCancerUrinary systemGastroenterologyAdenocarcinomaInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary signet-ring cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder is a disorder with little detailed information because it has an extremely low incidence and an unfavorable prognosis. We report the case of an 80-year-old male patient with primary signet-ring carcinoma of the bladder. The patient was a long-lived atomic bomb survivor of Hiroshima. He complained of asymptomatic gross hematuria while under successful endocrine treatment for organ-confined prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging showed diffuse thickening of the urinary bladder. Pathological specimens revealed an infiltrating growth of neoplastic cells with a signet-ring cell configuration. The o ral administration of t egafur-uracil (200 mg/m 2 per day) was initiated; however, the effect of this treatment was temporary. Fourteen months after the start of this treatment, the tumor had involved the bilateral intramural ureters and postrenal azotemia occurred because of bilateral hydronephrosis. Whether the prevalence of signet-ring cell carcinoma in the genitourinary tract is higher in atomic bomb survivors than in the general population remains much debated. The development of this rare and peculiar urothelial cancer after exposure to atomic bombing may give hints to the carcinogenic effect of ionizing radiation. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/wjnu99w

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Nephrology and UrologySame topicUrinary and Genital Oncology StudiesFrench-language works237,207