A148 DESMOID FIBROMATOSIS DIAGNOSED IN A 27-YEAR-OLD MALE AFTER BEING MISTAKEN FOR A GASTRIC GIST
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The gastrointestinal tract can be affected by both epithelial and non-epithelial tumors. When considering non-epithelial tumors, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common with an incidence of 7–15 cases per million per year. Fibroblastic desmoid tumors, originating from mesenchymal cells, are rarer with an incidence of 2–4 cases per million per year. Despite being distinct lesions, these tumors may appear similar on imaging when they involve the stomach wall or bowel. As a result, they may be confused with one another when initially diagnosed. Aims This report aims to present a case where a desmoid tumor was mistaken for a gastric GIST despite extensive investigation prior to laparotomy. Methods Retrospective review of one patient. Results A 27-year-old gentleman presented with acute left-sided abdominal pain and postprandial fullness that began 2 days prior. A CT-abdomen/pelvis demonstrated a large exophytic mass arising from the lesser sac of the stomach, in keeping with an aggressive gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). He was admitted and was further investigated with an endoscopic ultrasound, which demonstrated an exophytic hemorrhagic mass arising from the muscularis propria of the gastric wall. Again, this was most consistent with a GIST and urgent surgical resection was recommended. An exploratory laparotomy was organized the following day. There were no signs of a GIST intraoperatively, but rather a soft tissue tumor of the left mesentery of the transverse colon. This mass was resected, and a biopsy of the peritoneum was collected. Pathology identified a low-grade spindle cell tumor, CD117/CD34 negative with patchy cytoplasmic and nuclear β-catenin staining, in keeping with desmoid fibromatosis. Conclusions This case illustrates how GISTs and desmoid tumors are often mistaken for one another when associated with the stomach wall or bowel. Despite morphologic features of both tumors outlined in the literature, pathology, with focus on specific staining patterns, is necessary in many cases to distinguish the two. This distinction is paramount for appropriate prognostication and management, including timely investigation for associated diseases such as Familial Adenomatous Polyposis in patients with desmoid tumors. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".