MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800700360 · doi:10.14740/wjon1092w

A Case Series of Two Patients Presenting With Pericardial Effusion as First Manifestation of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With <i>BRAF</i> Mutation and Expression Of PD-L1

2018· article· en· W2800700360 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Mufti, Steven Ching, Sassan Farjami, Sharareh Shahangian, Serap Sobnosky

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePericardial effusionCardiac tamponadeLung cancerPericardiumPleural effusionCancerInternal medicineRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Involvement of pericardium occurs once cancer has progressed to stage IV which can cause massive effusion in the pericardial sac. This can lead to cardiac tamponade which can be fatal very quickly if untreated. The following is a two patient case series in which both patients presented with large pericardial effusion. The first patient sought medical attention due to new onset palpitations and was found to have hemorrhagic pericardial effusion and pulmonary embolism (PE). The second patient presented with shortness of breath. Investigations revealed that she had pericardial and pleural effusions along with multiple metastases throughout the body. Both patients ended up with a diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with BRAF mutation. One patient had V600E mutation; other patient had a variant p.D594N mutation. Both patients also had expression of PD-L1. World J Oncol. 2018;9(2):56-61 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1092w

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207