MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139067930 · doi:10.1097/pgp.0000000000000770

Dedifferentiation in Breast Metastasis of Endometrial Carcinoma: A Diagnostic Dilemma

2021· article· en· W3139067930 on OpenAlexaff
Varsha Shah, Sian E. Morgan, Martin Köbel, Cheng‐Han Lee, W. Glenn McCluggage

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Pathology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarcinomaMetastasisMedicineBreast carcinomaPathologyEndometrial cancerBreast cancerBiopsyOncologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most breast tumors are primary to this site; breast metastasis of endometrial origin is extremely rare. Low-grade endometrioid endometrial carcinomas can undergo dedifferentiation to undifferentiated carcinoma but such transformation at a metastatic site has been reported previously in only 2 cases. We report a case of dedifferentiation occurring in an isolated solitary breast metastasis of a low-grade endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. A 64-yr-old woman presented with a breast mass 2 yr after initial diagnosis of a grade 1 FIGO stage IIIA endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. Ultrasound guided biopsy of the breast mass showed a grade 1 endometrioid carcinoma which was diffusely estrogen receptor and PAX8-positive, consistent with metastasis from the previous endometrial carcinoma. The tumor initially responded to Letrozole therapy but then abruptly increased in size. Mastectomy revealed a poorly differentiated malignant tumor with morphology and immunophenotype (including loss of ARID1A and ARID1B immunoreactivity) consistent with undifferentiated endometrial carcinoma with no residual low-grade component. Awareness of the phenomenon of dedifferentiation of endometrial carcinoma in a metastatic site is important to avoid misdiagnosis as a primary breast cancer or metastasis from another primary site.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological PathologySame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207