Nowotwory neuroendokrynne trzustki — zasady diagnostyki i leczenia (rekomendowane przez Polską Sieć Guzów Neuroendokrynych)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents updated diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNEN), proposed by the Polish Network of Neuroendocrine Tumours. The guidelines contain new data received in the years 2013-2016, which confirm previous recommendations, and have led to modification of previous guidelines or have resulted in the formulation of new guidelines. Biochemical and imaging (anatomical and functional) tests are of great importance in diagnostics, as well as histopathological diagnosis to determine the management of PNEN patients, but they must be confirmed by an immunohistochemical examination. PNEN therapy requires collaboration among members of a multidisciplinary of specialists experienced in the management of these neoplasms. Surgery is the basic form of treatment in many cases. Further therapy requires a multidirectional procedure; therefore, the rules of biotherapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, molecular targeted therapy, and chemotherapy are discussed. (Endokrynol Pol 2017; 68 (2): 169-197)
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.012 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".