MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Case Report of a Primary Splenic Marginal Zone Lymphoma Patient Presenting with Factor VII Inhibitor

2010· article· en· W2559507836 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Hamm, Anargyros Xenocostas, Sindu Kanjeekal, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWindsor Regional HospitalUniversity of WindsorWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSplenic marginal zone lymphomaMedicineLupus anticoagulantGastroenterologyPathologyInternal medicineSpleenSplenectomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 4927 We present the case report of a 38 year old female presenting with primary splenic marginal zone lymphoma and a Factor VII inhibitor. She presented with pancytopenia (WBC 2.1 × 10@9/L, Hemoglobin 74 g/L, platelets 122× 10@9/L), an elevated INR 3.2 (0.8-1.2) and a normal aPTT 25 sec (22 - 36), and massive splenomegaly. Spleen measured 33 cm in length on coronal CT images. The liver was slightly prominent. There were no masses in liver or spleen, nor any abnormal adenopathy. Her IgM was elevated at 16.2 g/L(0.46-3.04), immunofixation positive for IgM Kappa. Bone marrow biopsy revealed patchy infiltrates of small lymphocytes strongly positive for CD 20. CD 5, Cyclin D1, CD10, CD23, CD138 and DBA44 were negative. Flow cytometry revealed a monoclonal infiltrate positive for CD19, CD20, FMC7, CD23, and kappa light chain restricted. Flow cytometry was negative for CD11c, CD25, and CD103. With this information, the diagnosis of primary splenic marginal zone lymphoma was made, despite the positive CD23 on flow cytometry. Splenectomy was not possible because of the coagulopathy. Mixing studies at 60 minutes did not correct the coagulopathy. Factor VII was low at 0.37 [0.5-2.0], Fibrinogen 2.78 g/L [2.00 - 4.00], Lupus anticoagulant was negative, Factor II 0.40 U/mL, [0.50-2.00], Factor V 0.37 U/mL [ 0.50– 2.00], Factor X 0.09 U/ml [0.50-2.00], and Factor VII inhibitor was elevated at 4.8 Bethesda units. Factor VII inhibitor showed cross reactivity with factors II, V, and VII. She was initially treated with fresh frozen plasma (> 8 units) and IV Vitamin K (10 units × 2) without correction of her INR. She underwent five days of plasma-pharesis with partial correction of her INR to 2.6. With concerns regarding bleeding risks, cytotoxic chemotherapy was avoided and patient was given single agent Rituximab at 375 mg/m2 for four weekly doses. The initial infusion was complicated with severe thrombocytopenia: 13,000 × 10@9. The platelet count recovered to > 75×10@9/L by day 4 post her first infusion. She received her second infusion on day 10. Her platelet count nadir was 50×10@9 this time. Her spleen had a remarkable response, shrinking to 15 cm below the costal angle following the first infusion and only splenic tip palpable by the fourth. Her INR continued to normalize and was at 1.4 by the end of the fourth cycle. The patient received four more weekly cycles of Rituximab with complete resolution of splenomegaly and coagulopathy. Following that the patient underwent splenectomy. Pathology on this spleen revealed no malignancy indicating complete remission to treatment. She received two years of maintenance Rituximab (one dose every 3 months) and remains disease free without recurrence of splenomegaly nor coagulopathy at 2.5 years followup. To our knowledge, only a handful of previous cases factor VII inhibitor have been reported. We report the successful management of a difficult case using anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody treatment alone. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→