PS1 - 181 Dural Metastases from Breast Cancer: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intracranial metastases from solid tumors are increasingly common, often brain or leptomeningeal metastases. Dural metastases are under-reported, present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, and may mimic subdural hematoma or meningioma. This report describes 4 recent patients with dural metastases from breast cancer. A 60 year old woman, without known cancer, had 5 months of increasing headaches, left weakness, and focal seizures. Imaging showed an enlarging right frontal extra-axial enhancing mass with edema, initially thought to be a meningioma. At surgery the tumor involved overlying bone, replaced the dura, and invaded brain. Pathology was metastatic adenocarcinoma, ER/PR positive and Her-2 negative. Investigations showed a right breast primary, and lung and bone metastases. She received cranial radiotherapy (RT), letrozole and pamidronate. The tumor remains controlled after 40 months. The 3 other patients all had prior known breast cancer, 2 ER/PR positive and Her-2 negative, and 1 triple negative, ages 45-70 years. Two had known systemic metastases prior to neurological presentation. Presenting symptoms included headache, seizures, focal weakness, and confusion. All had new or progressive systemic metastases, including bone, at diagnosis of dural metastases. Two had resection of dural metastases, 1 with complicated postoperative course, with eventual improvement in both. Two received cranial RT, 1 refused RT, and all received hormonal or chemotherapy, with ongoing clinical or MRI control. These cases illustrate the complexity of dural metastases. Although patients often have extensive metastatic disease, treatment can improve symptoms and prolong survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".