MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533597583 · doi:10.1097/dad.0000000000000760

A Rare Case of a Primary Cutaneous Desmoplastic Atypical Granular Cell Tumor

2016· article· en· W2533597583 on OpenAlexaff
Yasuhiro Nakamura, T Fujino, Koji Nagata, Taichi Imamura, Yukiko Teramoto, Yuri Asami, Eiichi Arai, Akifumi Yamamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Dermatopathology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTumors and Oncological Cases
Canadian institutionsSKiN Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranular cellPathologyHistologyGranular cell tumorStromaLesionImmunohistochemistryDesmoplastic small-round-cell tumorMedicinePleomorphism (cytology)CellBiologyInternal medicineCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Granular cell tumors are uncommon neoplasms and a small number of these neoplasms have been reported as showing malignant behavior. Here, we report a rare case of a solitary granular cell tumor that exhibited atypical histology, including an extensive desmoplastic stroma, in a 69-year-old woman. The surgical specimen revealed localized areas of spindling cells, areas of cellular pleomorphism, and p53 overexpression. Based on previously published criteria, we classified this lesion as an atypical granular cell tumor. To date, only very few case reports have documented this desmoplastic variant of granular cell tumor. However, the classifications of benign, atypical, and malignant granular cell tumors are still controversial, owing to an overlap of morphological and immunohistochemical profiles and lack of consistent histological criteria. Additionally, it is unknown whether the histology of the desmoplastic variant in the present case is significant for the classification of granular cell tumors and prediction of patient prognosis. Regardless of these issues, awareness, and close follow-up are required because of potential recurrences of this rare variant of granular cell tumor.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of DermatopathologySame topicTumors and Oncological CasesFrench-language works237,207