MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328668136 · doi:10.1097/bor.0b013e32834db53e

Langerhans cell histiocytosis and Erdheim–Chester disease

2011· review· en· W2328668136 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Rheumatology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistiocytic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLangerhans cell histiocytosisMedicineHistiocytosisHistiocyteImmune dysregulationErdheim–Chester diseaseDiseasePathogenesisImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an updated overview of the pathogenesis and treatment of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) and Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD). RECENT FINDINGS: There is ongoing debate as to the exact pathogenesis of these disorders and their classification as reactive versus neoplastic. Proinflammatory cytokines are known to play a role in both LCH and ECD and strengthen the hypothesis that, at least in part, they are disorders of immune dysregulation. The recent discovery of activating mutations in the proto-oncogene BRAF in a subset of LCH patients suggests that LCH is in fact a neoplastic disorder. Understanding of the mechanisms that promote proliferation and migration of histiocytes has led researchers to explore targeted immune-modulatory therapies for ECD. Similarly for LCH, alternative chemotherapeutic agents and reduced-intensity hematopoietic stem cell transplant are being evaluated for refractory disease. SUMMARY: More research is needed to better understand the cause of these disorders and may help in identifying new targeted therapies, particularly for patients with refractory or relapsed disease. Multinational trials are ongoing for LCH and are urgently needed for ECD.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.255 · 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