MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325711766 · doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e31823d0560

Well-differentiated Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Carcinoma in Tuberous Sclerosis—Case Report and Review of the Literature

2011· review· en· W2325711766 on OpenAlexaff
Nicoleta C. Arva, John Pappas, Teena Bhatla, Elizabeth A. Raetz, Michael Macari, Howard B. Ginsburg, Cristina Hajdu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberous Sclerosis Complex Research
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTuberous sclerosisTSC1Neuroendocrine tumorsTSC2PancreasMEN1Multiple endocrine neoplasiaPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayCancer researchEndocrine systemMedicinePathologyInternal medicineBiologyGeneGeneticsSignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas are rare in children. They usually occur in the setting of genetic syndromes such as multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1, von Hippel-Lindau disease, and neurofibromatosis 1. These tumors have also been reported in the tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), but the incidence is low in comparison with other syndromes. Only 9 cases have been described to date, and it is not yet well understood if any connection exists between TSC and pancreatic endocrine tumors. TSC is characterized by mutations in TSC1 and TSC2 genes, which activate the AKT-mTOR oncogenic cascade. Recent molecular studies in pancreatic endocrine tumors showed activation of the same pathway, which points toward a common molecular pathway between these two entities. We present a case of well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma of the pancreas in a child with TSC and discuss the genetic aspects of this disease.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations54
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicTuberous Sclerosis Complex ResearchFrench-language works237,207