MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476006458 · doi:10.1002/jso.24362

Metastatic pattern of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast-Emphasis on gastric metastases

2016· article· en· W2476006458 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali El‐Hage, Carolanne Ruel, Wahiba Afif, Hussein Wissanji, Jean‐Charles Hogue, Christine Desbiens, Guy Leblanc, Éric Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMetastasis and carcinoma case studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInvasive lobular carcinomaInvasive ductal carcinomaRadiologyMetastasisImmunohistochemistryBreast carcinomaGastric carcinomaOncologyBreast cancerInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) have different metastatic patterns, but the exact pattern of metastases from ILC is poorly known. This study aimed to determine the frequency of ILC metastases in atypical locations, with an emphasis on gastric metastases. METHODS: Patients with ILC treated at the Saint-Sacrement Hospital (Quebec City, Canada) and the Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital (Montreal, Canada) between January 2003 and December 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic, clinical, and follow-up data were retrieved from the medical charts. Metastases that were diagnosed during follow-up were recorded. RESULTS: Among the 481 patients with ILC, 74 (15.4%) were diagnosed with metastases after a median follow-up of 46 months. Among these 74 patients, 41.9% had metastases in atypical sites. Five patients were diagnosed with histologically confirmed gastric metastases of ILC. CONCLUSION: Metastases of breast ILC to atypical sites might be more frequent than previously reported. Clinicians should keep a high level of suspicion when a patient with a history of ILC develops digestive symptoms. It is important to differentiate metastases from a primary GI tumor by using immunohistochemical markers. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:543-547. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 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 score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicMetastasis and carcinoma case studiesFrench-language works237,207