A Sex Cord-stromal Tumor, Specifically a Fibroma, Arising From the Uterine Corpus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 12-yr-old girl presented with lordosis and an intraperitoneal mass that revealed a tumor attached to the uterine fundus. The fallopian tubes and ovaries were spared. The mass was completely excised, and a patch of the uterine fundus and the proximal one third of the fallopian tubes were resected. The lesion was composed of bland spindle cells that were positive for sex cord-stromal markers, with particularly strong staining for inhibin and CD56, as well as patchy staining for calretinin, WT1, and steroidogenic factor 1. Thus, the patient was diagnosed with a sex cord-stromal tumor, specifically a fibroma, arising from the uterine corpus. The pathogenesis of this tumor is unclear. An ovarian origin in the context of adherence or a tumor arising from sex cord-stromal ectopic tissues cannot be excluded, but seem unlikely. The tumor might appear as a particular form of uterine tumor resembling an ovarian sex cord tumor. However, this tumor would differ from the presently described classical form of uterine tumor resembling an ovarian sex cord tumor owing to a pure stromal differentiation instead of a pure sex cord differentiation. Finally, because of the low risk for recurrence, long-term follow-up was prescribed for the patient.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".