MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256024518 · doi:10.1177/2055116915597238

Cryptococcal nasopharyngeal polypoid mass in a cat

2015· article· en· W2256024518 on OpenAlexaff
Véronique Livet, Romain Javard, Kate Alexander, Christiane Girard, Marilyn Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery Open Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistopathologyMedicineItraconazolePathologyCryptococcusGastroenterologyDermatologyAntifungalBiologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case summary An indoor 9-year-old castrated male domestic cat was referred with a 4 month history of increased upper airway noise. Computed tomography revealed a nasopharyngeal polypoid mass, which was removed endoscopically with basket forceps. Histopathology was compatible with a polypoid granulomatous pharyngitis with Cryptococcus-like organisms. This was supported by a positive serum latex cryptococcal antigen agglutination test (LCAT). Minimal inflammation of the nasal tissue was noted on histopathology, with no evidence of fungus. Following endoscopic removal of the mass, the patient was treated with systemic antifungal medication (itraconazole). One year after diagnosis, the LCAT titer was negative and the cat remained free of clinical signs. Relevance and novel information This case report emphasizes the importance of considering Cryptococcus species as a potential etiology in cats presented with signs of nasopharyngeal obstruction with an isolated nasopharyngeal polypoid mass, even if kept indoors.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery Open ReportsSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207