Clinical behavior of intraocular teratoid medulloepithelioma in two‐related Quarter Horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to describe clinical behavior, histopathologic features, and immunohistochemical staining of two-related horses with intraocular teratoid medulloepithelioma. Two-related Quarter Horses with similar intraocular masses presented to the UF-CVM Comparative Ophthalmology Service for evaluation and treatment. The first horse, a 3-year-old gelding, had glaucoma and a cyst-like mass in the anterior chamber. Enucleation was performed. Histopathology revealed a teratoid medulloepithelioma. The tumor was considered to be completely excised. Fifteen months later, the gelding presented with swelling of the enucleated orbit and local lymph nodes with deformation of the skull. Cytology revealed neuroectodermal neoplastic cells. Necropsy confirmed tumor metastasis. Six weeks later, a 9-year-old mare, a full sibling to the gelding, presented for examination. An infiltrative mass of the iris and ciliary body was found that extended into the anterior, posterior, and vitreal chambers. Uveitis was present, but secondary glaucoma was not noted. Enucleation was performed and the histopathologic diagnosis was also teratoid medulloepithelioma. The mare has had no recurrence to date, 2 years following enucleation. Metastasis of intraocular teratoid medulloepithelioma is possible. Staging is recommended in cases where the diagnosis of teratoid medulloepithelioma is confirmed. Surveillance of full siblings is recommended until more information regarding etiology is known.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".