MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986256287 · doi:10.21873/anticanres.13831

Imaging Soft-tissue Sarcomas of the Head and Neck: A Tertiary Soft-tissue Sarcoma Unit Experience

2019· article· en· W2986256287 on OpenAlexaff
Alaa Alsadik Jaly, Khin Thway, Philip Touska, Anita Wale, Aisha Miah, Cyrus Kerawala, Francesco Riva, Eleanor Moskovic, Robin L. Jones, D. Strauß, Derfel ap Dafydd, Christina Messiou

Bibliographic record

VenueAnticancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAngiosarcomaSarcomaMedicineRhabdomyosarcomaSynovial sarcomaSoft tissueSoft tissue sarcomaChondrosarcomaRadiation therapyPathologyLymph nodeClear-cell sarcomaRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: To describe imaging features of head and neck soft-tissue sarcomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of head and neck sarcoma between 2011 and 2015 were reviewed. RESULTS: There were a total of 62 patients (24 female; median age=60 years). Most common sarcomas were angiosarcoma, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma and sarcoma not otherwise specified. They were most commonly located in cranial and neck superficial soft tissues. Average tumour size at presentation was 45 mm. One patient had metastasis at presentation (rhabdomyosarcoma); two had nodal disease (rhabdomyosarcoma and angiosarcoma) and two tumours contained calcification (chondrosarcoma and synovial sarcoma). Four arose after prior radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Unlike the more common diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma, the majority of head and neck sarcomas present as large, solitary, superficial masses without lymph node enlargement. Identification of these features on imaging should raise suspicion of a sarcoma diagnosis, particularly in the setting of previous irradiation or genetic susceptibility.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnticancer ResearchSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207