Intraocular Extension of Conjunctival Invasive Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Pterygium Surgery and Cataract Extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Conjunctival squamous dysplasia can often be confused with pterygium and pinguecula. Incomplete excision of dysplastic tissue can lead to recurrence and rarely intraocular invasion. This study describes two cases in which invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the conjunctiva was originally partially resected as pterygium and eventually required enucleation for intraocular invasion. METHODS: In this clinicopathologic small case series, two cases of intraocular SCC managed at a single tertiary ocular oncology institution are described. Clinical features, pathologic characteristics, and relevant imaging are described. RESULTS: In both cases, incomplete excision of conjunctival SCC was followed by rapid regrowth of the conjunctival lesion and signs of intraocular inflammation. An intraocular mass within the substance of the ciliary body was identified using ultrasound biomicroscopy in both the cases. Enucleation was performed. Pathologic features were typical to SCC. CONCLUSIONS: Intraocular spread on conjunctival SCC occurs only rarely but tends to follow recurrence of the conjunctival lesion after attempted excision. Modes of invasion may include direct invasion through sclera, along the tract of the anterior ciliary vessels, or inoculation through intraocular surgery incision.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".