Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an unusual case of a rare prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 65 year old gentleman was referred with symptoms of haematuria and haematospermia in association with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA). He was investigated with a flexible cystoscopy, Ultrasound scan and a computed tomography (CT) of his abdomen and pelvis. These failed to reveal any abnormality. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System PIRADS 2 lesion in the left peripheral gland and PIRADS 3 lesion on the right side posterolaterally at the level of mid gland of the prostate. He went on to have Transrectal ultrasound biopsies of his prostate (TRUS Bx) that excluded any pathology. On follow up visits his PSA continued to rise and he underwent Template biopsies of the prostate. The histological features had no evidence of any Prostatic intraepithelial carcinoma (PIN) or other malignancies. Flexible cystoscopy was repeated due to his persistent haematospermia. This showed prominent papillary lesions over his verumontanum and prostatic urethra. Biopsies from these areas revealed Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate (DACP). A subsequent staging MRI revealed unchanged appearance of the PIRADS2 nodule. There was however some low signal extending into the right seminal vesicle which is more pronounced than on the previous scan reported as PIRADS3. Subsequent mapping Template biopsies and Transurethral biopsies revealed a Gleason 4+4 DCAP. A staging CT and bone scan excluded any metastasis. He went on to receive an open radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection as a curative treatment for his locally advanced disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".