MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164408771 · doi:10.1136/jcp.2009.065433

Composite intestinal-type adenocarcinoma and small cell carcinoma of sinonasal tract

2009· article· en· W2164408771 on OpenAlexaff
Rahul Jain, Vera Gramigna, R. Sanchez-Marull, Bayardo Perez‐Ordoñez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynaptophysinChromogranin APathologyAdenocarcinomaSignet ring cell carcinomaCarcinomaSmall-cell carcinomaKeratin 8Neuroendocrine differentiationCytokeratinVillinKeratinBiologyImmunohistochemistryMedicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Sinonasal intestinal-type adenocarcinomas (ITACs) are rare neoplasms resembling intestinal adenocarcinomas. Although several studies have documented neuroendocrine differentiation in ITACs, the combination of ITAC and small cell carcinoma has not been previously described in detail. The aim of this report is to detail the histopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics of two cases of composite ITAC with small cell carcinoma. METHODS: Two cases of composite ITAC with small cell carcinoma were routinely processed, and representative sections were stained with CAM5.2, AE1:AE3, keratin 7, keratin 20, keratin 19, CDX-2, p63, villin, chromogranin, synaptophysin and CD56. RESULTS: One tumour consisted of a mixed-type ITAC showing colonic-type and poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma with foci of "signet-ring" cells combined with small cell carcinoma. Both components stained positively with CAM5.2, AE1:AE3, CK7, CK20 and CK19, whereas only the small cell carcinoma expressed synaptophysin and CD56. Both components stained negatively with CDX-2, villin, CD99 and p63. The "signet-ring" cells stained positively with chromogranin and synaptophysin. The second tumour showed a papillary-type ITAC combined with a small cell carcinoma. The adenocarcinoma and small cell carcinoma stained positively with CAM5.2, AE1:AE3, CK7, CK19 and CK20. Only the adenocarcinoma was CDX-2 positive, whereas the small cell carcinoma expressed CD56 and synaptophysin. CONCLUSIONS: The two components of the combined ITACs and neuroendocrine small cell carcinoma show significant immunohistochemical overlap, supporting a common origin. The occurrence of a distinct neuroendocrine carcinoma combined with ITACs expands the histopathological spectrum of these tumours.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207