A Rare Case of Local Recurrence Following Curative Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Intramucosal Differentiated-Type Gastric Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 78-year-old man underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of early gastric cancer (EGC) (type 0-IIa) in the anterior wall of the antrum. En bloc resection was achieved. The histopathological examination revealed very well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma (tub1) of 30 × 22 mm in size, confined to the mucosa. No lymphovascular invasion or ulceration was observed, and there was no undifferentiated-type component and the margins were tumor-free. Therefore, this lesion fulfilled the eCuraA criteria. Two years after ESD, esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed an irregular, slightly-depressed lesion within the post-ESD scar. Tubular adenocarcinoma was suspected based on histopathological examination of a biopsy specimen. The tumor was resected by ESD. A histopathological examination revealed well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma (tub1) of 6 × 4 mm in size, confined to the mucosa. No lymphovascular invasion was detected and the margins were tumor-free. These findings indicated a curative resection. Recurrence following a curative ESD of an intramucosal differentiated-type EGC which fulfilled the eCuraA criteria is rare. Careful endoscopic observation using magnifying narrow band imaging (NBI) is needed after ESD, even when curative resection is achieved. Gastroenterol Res. 2019;12(2):103-106 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1159
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".