MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135938545 · doi:10.1002/jso.23537

Appendiceal goblet cell carcinoid and mucinous neoplasms are closely associated tumors: Lessons from their coexistence in primary tumors and concurrence in peritoneal dissemination

2013· article· en· W2135938545 on OpenAlexaff
Denise Ng, Vincent Falck, Yarrow J. McConnell, Lloyd A. Mack, Walley Temple, Xianyong Gui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraperitoneal and Appendiceal Malignancies
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePseudomyxoma peritoneiAppendixMucinous carcinomaAdenocarcinomaPathologyRectumCancerInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Goblet cell carcinoid (GCC) and appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs) are considered as different appendiceal tumors. Coexistence of both tumors was occasionally noted. We further observed the concurrence in both primary tumors and their peritoneal dissemination, that is, peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) including pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP). METHODS: Review of our 10-year file identified two subgroups of cases with such concurrence. Group 1 is 14 cases of PC/PMP treated by surgical cytoreduction. Morphologic components of GCC, low-grade mucinous neoplasm (LMN), mucinous adenocarcinoma (MCA), and non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (NMCA) were identified separately in different organs/tissues. Group 2 is eight cases of localized primary tumors of appendix and ileocecal junction. RESULTS: In Group 1, primary tumors (11 GCC, 1 GCC + LMN, 1 MCA, 1 NMCA) were identified in appendix (13) and in rectum (1). Further review identified mixed morphologic components in 7/12 GCC cases, including GCC + LMN (2), GCC + MCA (2), GCC + NMCA (1), and GCC + MCA + NMCA (2). Over peritoneal dissemination, GCC and/or other components were coexistent at different sites and in variable combinations. In Group 2, primary tumors were initially diagnosed as GCC (7) and MCA (1). Further review identified mixed components in all cases, including GCC + LMN (3), GCC + LMN + MCA (3), GCC + MCA + NMCA (2). CONCLUSIONS: GCC may present as a component mixed with AMNs and even with conventional adenocarcinoma in both primary tumors and metastatic lesions. AMN in any given single case may show a wide morphologic spectrum. GCC and AMN may share a common tumor stem cell with potential of multiple lineage differentiations.

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 score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicIntraperitoneal and Appendiceal MalignanciesFrench-language works237,207