MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131563064

Intraparenchymal chordoid Meningioma After Radiotherapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

2014· article· en· W2131563064 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa Efendioğlu, Recep Başaran, Dogan Gundogan, Mustafa Kakşı, Aydın Sav, Tuncay Kaner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of cancer research updates · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyMeningiomaLymphomaStage (stratigraphy)RadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingPathologicalChemotherapySurgeryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Hodgkin lymphoma can be treated by radiotherapy or chemotherapy alone or combined. Meningiomas account for 1-4.2% of all primary intracranial tumors in children, and chordoid meningioma is a very rare subtype. In this study, we investigated a case of an intraparenchymal chordoid meningioma that developed during the early stage in a patient with Hodgkin lymphoma who had been treated with radiotherapy. Case: A 10-year-old male patient was diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma and was treated with a combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. He presented at our emergency service 6 years later. He had a fever and was suffering from discomfort and insignificant left hemiparesis (4/5). Contrast-enhanced cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a mass in the right temporoparietal region. The intracranial lesion was surgically excised. The tumor was identified as a WHO grade 2 chordoid meningioma by the pathological examination. The Ki-67 proliferation index was found to be 20-25%. Conclusion: Surgeons must remember that radiation-associated meningiomas may occur in the early stage of the treatment as well as in the late stage. Young patients with grade 2 chordoid meningiomas must be followed-up in case of recurrence, and tumors with high Ki-67 indexes are highly expected to relapse.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of cancer research updatesSame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207