MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141772394 · doi:10.3109/13816810.2011.575431

Chiasmatic Infiltration Secondary to Late Malignant Transformation of Retinoma

2011· article· en· W2141772394 on OpenAlexaff
Asimina Mataftsi, Léonidas Zografos, Aubin Balmer, S. Uffer, Roger Stupp, Robert C. Janzer, Alessia Pica, Daniel F. Schorderet, Francis L. Munier

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Genetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute in Oncology and Hematology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnucleationRetinoblastomaMalignant transformationRadiation therapyHemianopsiaSurgeryLesionOphthalmologyPathologyVisual field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To report the lethal course of malignant transformation of retinoma in an adult. METHODS: Case report. A 40-year-old patient presented with retinoma in his right eye and retinoblastoma in his left eye. Enucleation was recommended but refused and the patient received whole eye radiotherapy elsewhere. Five years later he presented again, with temporal hemianopsia of the left eye secondary to chiasmatic invasion. RESULTS: Diagnosis of retinoblastoma infiltration was confirmed by stereotactic biopsy of the chiasmatic lesion. Treatment with intravenous and intrathecal chemotherapy led to partial remission, and was followed by stereotactic irradiation of the chiasmatic mass and right optic nerve. The left eye was enucleated. Death occurred one year later due to cerebrospinal fluid metastases. CONCLUSION: Extraocular extension of retinoblastoma diagnosed in adulthood has never, to our knowledge, been reported. This case stresses the importance of lifelong retinoma monitoring and the necessity for radical treatment in the event of malignant transformation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic GeneticsSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207