MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151779666 · doi:10.3747/co.v16i6.424

Partial Cancerous Changes Eventually Developing into Superficial Spreading Cancer over 18 Months

2009· article· en· W2151779666 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yongxi Song, Z. Wang, Qingchao Tang, Hongming Xu, Chungen Xing, Zhi‐Feng Miao, Chang-Shiu Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerDissection (medical)GastrectomyStomachLymph nodePathologyLymphGastroenterologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this report, we describe a patient presenting with the superficial spreading type of early gastric cancer (EGC) accompanied by cancerous ulcers. Disease progression and treatment outcome are discussed. After symptoms persisted for more than 1 year, the patient underwent total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection. The patient was diagnosed with superficial spreading cancer (SSC), accompanied by an extensive iic lesions. The progression of this patient suggests that the co-occurrence of cancerous ulcers may contribute to EGC development to some extent. As is known, EGC often develops into advanced gastric cancer with time. However, in our case, we observed a process during which partial cancerous changes developed into ssc over 18 months. Superficial spreading cancer should be considered an EGC variant, which may have the ability to spread superficially along the stomach wall without invading the muscularis propria. But we speculate that, if gene expression changes for some reason, the malignant SSC cells may acquire the ability to grow deeply into the stomach wall. Eventually, Borrmann type IV gastric cancer may develop.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207