Metastatic pulmonary calcification: high-resolution computed tomography findings in 23 cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) findings in patients diagnosed with metastatic pulmonary calcification (MPC). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the HRCT findings from 23 cases of MPC [14 men, 9 women; mean age, 54.3 (range, 26-89) years]. The patients were examined between 2000 and 2014 in nine tertiary hospitals in Brazil, Chile, and Canada. Diagnoses were established by histopathologic study in 18 patients and clinical-radiological correlation in 5 patients. Two chest radiologists analyzed the images and reached decisions by consensus. Results: The predominant HRCT findings were centrilobular ground-glass nodules (n = 14; 60.9%), consolidation with high attenuation (n = 10; 43.5%), small dense nodules (n = 9; 39.1%), peripheral reticular opacities associated with small calcified nodules (n = 5; 21.7%), and ground-glass opacities without centrilobular ground-glass nodular opacity (n = 5; 21.7%). Vascular calcification within the chest wall was found in four cases and pleural effusion was observed in five cases. The abnormalities were bilateral in 21 cases. Conclusion: MPC manifested with three main patterns on HRCT, most commonly centrilobular ground-glass nodules, often containing calcifications, followed by dense consolidation and small solid nodules, most of which were calcified. We also described another pattern of peripheral reticular opacities associated with small calcified nodules. These findings should suggest the diagnosis of MPC in the setting of hypercalcemia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".