Bone Marrow Involvement by Aggressive B Cell Lymphoma Undetected by Aspirate Immunophenotyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Staging for newly diagnosed lymphoma is an essential diagnostic step aimed at not only estimating prognosis but also refining the ensuing therapeutic pathway. Bone marrow is routinely sampled for this reason. Morphological assessment of the bone marrow aspirate and biopsy remains the gold standard approach. Nonetheless, ancillary testing such as aspirate immunophenotyping is also used with the aim to increase sensitivity and add diagnostic utility, e.g., to provide proof of clonality. Both of these techniques are fraught with shortcomings and concordance is often not perfect. Cases of infiltrative lymphoma identified by morphology, and not detected by flow cytometry highlights the dangers of over reliance on aspirate immunophenotyping. Under sampling, disintegration, fibrosis and hemodilution are but some causes of a false negative flow result. Therefore, neither technique is sufficient in isolation. In this submission, a case of such a discrepancy is presented as an introduction for review of literature that highlights this phenomenon.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".