MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331091799 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2014-208117

Vanishing bile duct syndrome in the context of concurrent temozolomide for glioblastoma

2014· article· en· W2331091799 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Mason, Oyedele Adeyi, Scott Fung, Barbara‐Ann Millar

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemozolomideMedicineBile ductJaundiceAsymptomaticContext (archaeology)GastroenterologyInternal medicineDacarbazineLiver functionUrsodeoxycholic acidRadiation therapyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temozolomide, an oral alkylating agent, is used in the treatment of glioblastoma. We describe a case of a 62-year-old woman developing jaundice with significant derangement of liver function tests on day 17 of focal radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide. There was no structural abnormality on imaging and liver biopsy was performed. Pathology revealed absence of small terminal bile ducts affecting up to 60% of sampled portal tracts and senescence of many of the remaining small bile ducts, in keeping with a diagnosis of acute vanishing bile duct syndrome. This is a rare syndrome. It has been documented in association with Hodgkin's lymphoma and viral causes. Drugs implicated as precipitating this condition include antiseizure medications, some antibiotics, ibuprofen and antifungals. Temozolomide was stopped. The patient received supportive care, ursodeoxycholic acid 750 mg daily and cholestyramine 4 g twice daily. She was otherwise asymptomatic and her blood results returned to normal by day 129.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207