MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787915872 · doi:10.7759/cureus.2238

Abscopal Effect in a Stage IV Melanoma Patient who Progressed on Pembrolizumab

2018· article· en· W2787915872 on OpenAlexaff
James Man Git Tsui, Catalin Mihalcioiu, Fabio Cury

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbscopal effectPembrolizumabRadiation therapyMelanomaLesionMucosal melanomaLungLarynxRadiologyStage (stratigraphy)ImmunotherapySurgeryInternal medicineCancerCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this case report, we present the clinical course of a woman with locally advanced mucosal melanoma of the oral cavity. She was initially treated with surgery with adjuvant local radiation of 50 Gy in 20 fractions. She quickly relapsed with an aggressive regional recurrence of the disease on the neck and with numerous pulmonary metastases. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab was started, with initial good response and reduction in the size of the lesion in the neck. The regression, however, was short-lived, as the mass quickly grew at a remarkable rate and the lung lesions progressed significantly. Palliative local radiation of 24 Gy in three fractions delivered at days zero, seven, and 21 to the neck mass was eventually given with the goal to alleviate symptoms. An immediate tumor regression was observed after the first fraction of radiotherapy. Remarkably, the lung lesions had also started regressing following radiation. We believe this to be a case of abscopal effect witnessed during the delivery of radiotherapy. A review of the recent literature is also presented here.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207