Copper-Associated Hepatitis in Labrador Retrievers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Labrador Retrievers with elevated hepatic copper levels have been reported; however, it is unclear whether primary copper-associated hepatitis occurs in this breed. The objective of this study was to determine whether copper-associated hepatitis could be identified in Labradors by reviewing cases from the Diagnostic Center for Population and Animal Health, Michigan State University. Sixteen Labrador Retrievers (3 male, 12 female, and 1 of undetermined sex) between 4 and 11 years old, had multifocal and coalescing, centrilobular hepatitis characterized by macrophages with abundant intracytoplasmic copper and hemosiderin. Other lesions included multifocal, centrilobular and random, pigmented granulomas, hepatocellular necrosis, intrahepatic cholestasis, centrilobular or bridging fibrosis, and occasionally, pseudolobule formation. In rhodanine-stained sections, copper was concentrated in the cytoplasm of centrilobular and midzonal hepatocytes and in macrophages, which is consistent with copper-associated hepatitis. In 12 of the dogs, quantitative liver copper levels were available, and in all but 2 dogs the levels were greater than 2,000 parts per million dry weight (ppm dw). One dog had a liver copper level of 1,990 ppm dw and one dog with advanced hepatic cirrhosis had a level of 1,490 ppm dw. The findings suggest that primary copper-associated hepatitis likely occurs in Labrador Retrievers.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it