Primary Ewing's sarcoma of the sinonasal tract in adults: A challenging disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sinonasal localization of Ewing's sarcoma in adults is an exceedingly rare event. METHODS: The clinical records of 5 patients with primary sinonasal Ewing's sarcoma treated from 1992 to 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. All pathologic slides were reviewed by 2 experienced pathologists. All patients underwent multimodality treatments. RESULTS: Median age was 36 years (range, 25-52 years). At referral, 2 patients had the original diagnosis changed by review of the histologic slides. Tumors were classified as T4aN0M0 (4 patients) and T2N0M0 (1 patient). Median follow-up was 110 months (range, 70-139 months). Only 1 patient, who started treatment elsewhere based on an incorrect histologic diagnosis, experienced multiple recurrences and eventually died of widespread metastasis. CONCLUSION: Correct pathologic diagnosis can have a crucial impact on treatment planning and outcome. Multimodality therapy is the key for long-term successful results. Because of the rarity of the tumor, referral to highly experienced care centers is strongly recommended. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 39: E45-E50, 2017.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".