MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413544455 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000000508

Eosinophilic, Solid, and Cystic Renal Cell Carcinoma

2015· article· en· W2413544455 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberous Sclerosis Complex Research
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesRockyview General HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsRenal cell carcinomaMedicinePathologyEosinophilicCarcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A unique renal neoplasm characterized by eosinophilic cytoplasm and solid and cystic growth was recently reported in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). We searched multiple institutional archives and consult files in an attempt to identify a sporadic counterpart. We identified 16 morphologically identical cases, all in women, without clinical features of TSC. The median age was 57 years (range, 31 to 75 y). Macroscopically, tumors were tan and had a solid and macrocystic (12) or only solid appearance (4). Average tumor size was 50 mm (median, 38.5 mm; range, 15 to 135 mm). Microscopically, the tumors showed solid areas admixed with variably sized macrocysts and microcysts that were lined by cells with a pronounced hobnail arrangement. The cells had voluminous eosinophilic cytoplasm with prominent granular cytoplasmic stippling and round to oval nuclei with prominent nucleoli. Scattered histiocytes and lymphocytes were invariably present. Thirteen of 16 patients were stage pT1; 2 were pT2, and 1 was pT3a. The cells demonstrated a distinct immunoprofile: nuclear PAX8 expression, predominant CK20-positive/CK7-negative phenotype, patchy AMACR staining, but no CD117 reactivity. Thirteen of 14 patients with follow-up were alive and without disease progression after 2 to 138 months (mean: 53 mo; median: 37.5 mo); 1 patient died of other causes. Although similar to a subset of renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) seen in TSC, we propose that sporadic "eosinophilic, solid, and cystic RCC," which occurs predominantly in female individuals and is characterized by distinct morphologic features, predominant CK20-positive/CK7-negative immunophenotype, and indolent behavior, represents a novel subtype of RCC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.317
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