MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171614624 · doi:10.4021/wjon391w

Should Internal Mammary Lymph Node Biopsy Be a Routine Step in Recurrent Breast Cancer? Report of Three Cases With Negative Axilla and Positive Internal Mammary Node

2011· article· en· W2171614624 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chatzopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAxillaBreast cancerBiopsyLymph nodeRadiologyOncologyLymphCancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lymph node status is the most important clinicopathological prognostic factor for breast cancer patients and in most breast units it reflects only the axillary lymph nodes. A second often overlooked basin consists of the internal mammary lymph nodes (IMLNs) whose evaluation is not done as a routine step during the staging process. We highlight the need to consider incorporation of IMLNs into a patient's staging by presenting three cases of recurrent breast cancer with negative axilla and positive IMLN, a finding which altered their final management. We suggest that biopsy of IMLN should be a routine step in recurrent breast cancer when axillary lymphatics are disrupted by previous surgery although further research is required to define the optimal management of node positive cases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207