MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144069186 · doi:10.4021/wjnu45w

Cutaneous Metastases From Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Renal Pelvis: A Case Report

2012· article· en· W3144069186 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Komeya

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Nephrology and Urology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal pelvisTransitional cell carcinomaAbdomenUreterMetastasisPyelogramRadiologyRenal hilumUrine cytologyNephrectomyPathologicalBiopsyUrinary systemUrologyKidneyPathologyCancerInternal medicineCystoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 73-year-old female patient presented with left back pain. Computed tomography showed a mass around the left renal hilum and subcutaneous masses in her abdomen. She was referred to our hospital. Retrograde pyelography showed an upper urinary tract obstruction. Urinary cytology of the ureter was negative. Biopsy of the subcutaneous mass was performed, and the pathological findings showed transitional cell carcinoma. She was diagnosed with transitional cell carcinoma of the left renal pelvis with metastasis to the skin (cT4N0M1). She received combination chemotherapy, but the size of her skin lesions was increasing. Three months after admission, she died. Metastasis to the skin from the renal pelvis is very rare; only four cases have been reported. Our case is the first report on transitional cell carcinoma of the renal pelvic metastasizing to only the skin at presentation. We herein summarize this rare metastasis and discuss its clinical features and therapeutic management. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/wjnu45w

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Nephrology and UrologySame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207