Cardiac angiosarcoma: two cases and a review of the literature.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary cardiac tumours are rare, and primary malignant cardiac tumours even rarer. Of these, cardiac angiosarcomas are uncommon and, until recently, almost invariably diagnosed at the time of autopsy, primarily because the symptoms are initially nonspecific and do not become manifest until the tumour is advanced. METHODS: Two patients, who presented in quite different manners and were diagnosed at autopsy and at open surgical biopsy, are presented. The literature on cardiac angiosarcomas is reviewed critically, with emphasis on presentation and morphology. RESULTS: This review of the literature shows that, with increasing availability of newer diagnostic tools, especially noninvasive ones, diagnosis of this rare lesion can be made at an early stage and confirmed at cardiac biopsy or cardiac surgery. Unfortunately, so far, the results remain virtually uniformly poor, though occasionally survival at up to 53 months has been reported.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it