MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044580251 · doi:10.4103/ijo.ijo_2158_19

Simultaneous choroidal and conjunctival metastases from renal cell carcinoma

2020· article· en· W3044580251 on OpenAlexaff
Hatem Krema, An‐Ning Chao, Bayardo Perez‐Ordoñez, Mostafa Hanout, Kalpana Rose

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Ophthalmology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFundus (uterus)Renal cell carcinomaLesionHistopathological examinationPathologyPhysical examinationOphthalmologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 50-year-old male patient was referred for an assessment of a choroidal lesion in the right eye. He also noticed a rapidly growing caruncle lesion about 2 weeks prior to his visit. His medical history was remarkable for metastatic diseases from clear cell renal carcinoma 1 year before. On ophthalmic evaluation, his visual acuity was 20/20 in both eyes. Anterior segment examination of the right eye showed a red protruding mass at the caruncle [Fig. 1]. Dilated fundus examination demonstrated an amelanotic choroidal lesion at the inferior temporal arcade [Fig. 2]. Ultrasound examination identified a dome-shaped choroidal tumor, with medium internal reflectivity [Fig. 3]. The left eye examination was normal. The caruncle tumor was excised totally. Histopathological examination revealed nests of clear cells with abundant cytoplasm, which confirmed a metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) [Fig. 4]. The right eye was treated with radiotherapy in addition to the second line of systemic targeted therapy. There is no recurrence of conjunctival tumor or choroidal tumors 18 months after treatment [Fig. 5].Figure 1: Anterior segment examination of the right eye showed a red protruding mass at caruncleFigure 2: Dilated fundus examination demonstrated an amelanotic choroidal lesion measuring 5 mm in diameter at inferior temporal fundusFigure 3: Ultrasound examination revealed a domed shaped choroidal tumor, 2.9 mm in thickness with variable internal reflectivityFigure 4: The histopathological examination of the excised caruncle tumor revealed nests of clear cells with abundant cytoplasm, which was conclusive of a metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the caruncleFigure 5: There is no recurrence of conjunctival tumorDiscussion Choroidal metastasis from RCC accounts for only 3% of all choroidal metastases.[123] There were only three cases of conjunctival metastasis from RCC reported in the literature.[45] Two cases presented with a unilateral conjunctival mass as the first presentation of RCC. The third case presented with bilateral choroidal metastases from RCC and developed bilateral conjunctival metastases 6 months later. This is a patient who has an advanced stage of RCC, which is refractory to first-line targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The biopsy of the tumor at caruncle confirmed the nature of the intraocular tumor. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case to describe concurrent conjunctival and choroidal metastases from RCC, which may represent a more aggressive phenotype of RCC, and requires close monitoring of advanced disease. Declaration of patient consent The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of OphthalmologySame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207