In Compressed Lung Tissue Microscopic Sections of Adenocarcinoma In Situ May Mimic Papillary Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Surgical removal and pathologic handling of lung tissue has a compressive effect upon its architecture. The effect of surgical atelectasis on morphology has not been examined in depth, especially with respect to lung adenocarcinomas. OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of surgical atelectasis on morphologic lepidic growth pattern, mimicking papillary adenocarcinoma pattern. DESIGN: In 2 cases serial sections of resected pulmonary adenocarcinoma were used, as was a 3-dimensional reconstruction. Elastin stains were performed on primary and metastatic adenocarcinomas. RESULTS: Perfusion fixation of another case showed marked morphologic differences of less compressed peripheral lung tissue, emphasizing the preexisting alveolar structure. An elastic stain may help identify true lesional architecture. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that microscopic sections of adenocarcinoma in situ in compressed/collapsed tissue may give rise to a pseudopapillary pattern mimicking invasive adenocarcinoma. Accurate appreciation of different tumor architecture in lung adenocarcinoma has important biologic and clinical implications. Pathologists should be aware of the possibility of misclassification of adenocarcinoma pattern due to tissue artifacts caused by lung tissue handling.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".