Undifferentiated (Anaplastic) Carcinoma of the Pancreas with Osteoclast-Like Giant Cells Showing Various Degree of Pancreas Duct Involvement. A Case Report and Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Undifferentiated (anaplastic) carcinoma of the pancreas with osteoclast-like giant cells is exceedingly rare. The prognosis of undifferentiated carcinoma is worse than that of poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas; however, undifferentiated carcinoma with osteoclast-like giant cells might have a more favorable prognosis. CASE REPORT: We report the case of undifferentiated carcinoma of the pancreas with osteoclast-like giant cells, showing an intraductal growth pattern with various degree of pancreas duct involvement in the different areas. As a result, we were able to demonstrate the entire spectrum of changes, ranging from the early, minimal intraluminal growth to the partial or complete occlusion of the branches of the main pancreatic duct, and finally invasion and formation of the large necrotic/degenerated cysts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the epithelial origin of undifferentiated carcinoma of the pancreas with osteoclast-like giant cells. In early stages, the affected pancreatic duct epithelium was intermingled with nonepithelial component and had an immunoprofile distinctive from the epithelial lining of the uninvolved (normal) pancreatic ducts. Distinctive immunoprofile (CK 5/6, p63 and p53 positive) of the epithelial component and p63 and p53 positivity of the nonepithelial component should be explained and further investigated in the similar cases. Our findings support prior assertions that undifferentiated carcinoma of the pancreas with osteoclast-like giant cells may develop from carcinoma in situ within the main pancreatic duct or its branches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".