MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951118748 · doi:10.1093/jscr/rjz177

Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: a case report and literature review

2019· article· en· W2951118748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simmi Patel, Armand Asarian, Philip Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Case Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePapillary renal cell carcinomasClear cellClear cell renal cell carcinomaPathologyTransplantationRenal cell carcinomaCytokeratinChromophobe cellCarcinomaClear cell carcinomaPathologicalInternal medicineImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma (CCPRCC), a type of low-grade renal cell neoplasm was recently included in the 2016 WHO classification of renal tumors (Tickoo SK, dePeralta-Venturina Mariza N, Harik LR, Worcester Heath D, Salama ME, Young AN et al. Spectrum of epithelial neoplasms in end-stage renal disease: an experience from 66 tumor bearing kidneys with emphasis on histologic patterns distinct from those in sporadic adult renal neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 30:141–153, 2006). While being recognized as its own entity, there is little research on CCPRCC. The specific tumor comprises of 9.3% of all renal tumors in young adults with an age range of 18-88 years (Wang Y, Ding Y, Wang J, Gu M, Wang Z, Qin C et al. Clinical features and survival of clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: 10-year retrospective study from two institutions. Oncology letters 16:1010–22, 2018.). In this article we provide recent understanding of CCPRCC and how to identify its distinct pathological entity. It is strongly positive for cytokeratin 7 (CK7), vimentin and mostly negative for CD10 and AMACR (Zhanyong B and John TE Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma in bilateral native kidneys after 2 year of renal transplantation: report of a case and review of literature. Case Reports in Transplantation 2011:11–4, 2011). Histopathologically, all cases of CCPRCC exhibited a tubular and papillary architecture, cuboidal tumor cells with clear cytoplasm and low Fuhrman grade (Wang Y, Ding Y, Wang J, Gu M, Wang Z, Qin C et al. Clinical features and survival of clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: 10-year retrospective study from two institutions. Oncology letters 16:1010–22, 2018; Kuroda N, Ohe C, Kawakami F, Mikami S, Furuya M, Matsuura K et al. Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: a review. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 7: 7312–18, 2004.; Srigley JR, Delahunt B, Eble JN, Egevad L, Epstein JI, Grignon D, et al. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Vancouver Classification of Renal Neoplasia. Am J surg Pathol. 37:1469–89, 2013). This case report and literature review highlights the cryptomorphic, immunohistochemical and cytogenic features of CCPRCC which will assist in understanding and managing these tumors.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical Case ReportsSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207