MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025235907 · doi:10.1111/cup.13738

Metastatic aneurysmal fibrous histiocytoma in a 20‐year‐old woman: A rare case report with review of the literature and discussion of its genomic features

2020· review· en· W3025235907 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly A. Wood, Alexandra Easson, Danny Ghazarian, Zaid Saeed Kamil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Pathology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNodule (geology)PathologyDifferential diagnosisMedicineAxillaDermisBiologyBreast cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aneurysmal fibrous histiocytoma is an uncommon variant of cutaneous fibrous histiocytomas with a local recurrence rate of 19%. We present a case of aneurysmal fibrous histiocytoma in a 20-year-old female with a regional lymph node metastasis and subsequent satellite nodule. The patient initially presented with a 1-month history of two palpable nodules in left lower anterior shoulder and left axilla. Needle core biopsies from both lesions revealed an atypical spindle cell neoplasm with a differential diagnosis of aneurysmal fibrous histiocytoma and angiomatoid fibrous histiocytoma. The axillary dissection confirmed a metastatic deposit in 1 out of 22 lymph nodes. At 6 months a satellite nodule arose between the resection scar and the axilla histopathologically demonstrating a cellular spindle cell nodule at the dermis subcutaneous junction with large, blood-filled pseudovascular spaces lined by histiocytes. The periphery of the lesion showed collagen trapping without a lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate. The lesional cells were diffusely positive for CD10 and focally for CD68 and Illumina RNA fusion panel sequencing was negative. Herein we present this case of metastatic aneurysmal fibrous histiocytoma with review of the literature and discussion of biology, cytogenetic alterations, and differential diagnosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous PathologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207