MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169782110 · doi:10.3747/co.19.1091

Adenocarcinoma Not Otherwise Specified on Dorsum of Tongue: Case Report and Literature Review

2012· article· en· W2169782110 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brenna A. Market-Velker, Alexander V. Louie, Vikram Velker, Keith Kwan, Jason Franklin, V. Venkatesan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Tumors Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreCancer Care OntarioWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTongueMedicineAdenocarcinomaDysphagiaDorsumRadiation therapyBasal cellTongue NeoplasmSurgeryDermatologyPathologyAnatomyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary adenocarcinoma of the oropharynx most often arises from the minor salivary glands, and primary squamous cell carcinoma is more commonly seen arising from the tongue. Few cases of adenocarcinoma not otherwise specified of the tongue have been reported in the literature, and none found on the dorsum of the tongue. Successful treatment strategies have therefore not been defined.We report a case of adenocarcinoma located on the dorsum of the posterior one third of the tongue adjacent to the circumvallate papillae in a woman presenting with globus sensation and mild dysphagia. Treatment consisted of transoral laser excision and postoperative external-beam radiotherapy, resulting in disease-free survival at her 5-year follow-up. The goals of this report are to present a case of adenocarcinoma arising from the minor salivary gland located on the dorsum of the tongue, to discuss previous reports of similar cases, and to suggest that surgery with or without radiotherapy be used as the mainstay of treatment.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicSalivary Gland Tumors Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207