MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118558808 · doi:10.14740/jcgo.v0i0.675

Myxoid Leiomyosarcoma of the Uterus: A Case Report With Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings

2020· article· en· W3118558808 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aya Tanabe, Tetsuo Maeda, Yasuo Nakata, Shigeki Yoshida

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalignancyMagnetic resonance imagingLesionLeiomyosarcomaRadiologyEffective diffusion coefficientUterusHysterectomyMyometriumPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myxoid leiomyosarcoma (M-LMS) of the uterus is extremely rare and its diagnosis is challenging. We report a case of the M-LMS in a 69-year-old female who referred to our hospital for abdominal discomfort and increased uterine mass lesion. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated a well-defined intramural mass (approximately 8 cm in diameter) that exhibited isointensity to myometrium on T1-weighted images, and markedly high heterogeneous intensity and flow-void area suggestive of abundant blood flow on T2-weighted images. On diffusion weighted imaging, the major portion the mass showed high intensity, but it was considered to be T2 shine-through effect, because the mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value of the lesion was relatively high. Thus, we could not make the diagnosis of malignancy. However, considering the increase tendency of the mass at the postmenopausal status, the possibility of malignancy could not be ruled out, so a total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was performed. The result of pathologic assessment is M-LMS. A diagnosis of M-LMS is difficult preoperatively. In the case that myxoid tumor is suspected, although malignancy is not definite, we might have to consider the possibility of malignancy from the age of the patient and the tendency of the lesion to increase. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2021;10(1):18-21 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo675

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Gynecology and ObstetricsSame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207