MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2914429602 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v10i2.3223

Utility of Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Plasmacytoma

2019· article· en· W2914429602 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nitya Prabhakaran, Alexander W. Scott, Magda Esebua

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlasmacytomaFine-needle aspirationSternumPathologyBiopsyRadiologyOpen biopsyRib cageBone marrowMultiple myelomaSurgeryAnatomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plasmacytomas are rare extramedullary plasma cell neoplasms that present in bone and/or soft tissue. Diagnosis can require a variety of laboratory approaches such as serum protein electrophoresis, bone marrow biopsy, Bence Jones protein assays, and imaging. However, few case reports describe using fine needle aspiration for diagnosis. We present a case of a plasmacytoma diagnosis in a 55-year-old patient, who initially presented to the emergency room with symptoms of chest pain. Imaging revealed right apical and medial lung mass extending just posterior to the trachea with invasion and destruction of the anterolateral T3 vertebral body. Multiple smaller hypodensities were also present in thoracic vertebral bodies, ribs, and sternum. Biopsies were performed on the mediastinal mass. Fine needle aspiration revealed groups of mature and immature plasma cells at various stages of maturation. Flow cytometry demonstrated a kappa light chain-restricted plasma cell population. Paraffin immunoperoxidase studies showed that the neoplastic cells bore monotypic kappa light chains. The patient’s presentation emphasizes the utility of fine needle aspiration, in conjunction with other ancillary studies, for diagnosing plasmacytomas. J Med Cases. 2019;10(2):37-40 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3223

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→