Granular cell tumor of the abdominal wall, a case report and review of literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Granular cell tumors (GCTs) on the abdominal wall are rare and present as a painless superficial abdominal mass. We report the case of a 73-year-old female, who presented to the family medicine practice with a painless subcutaneous anterior abdominal wall mass. Ultrasound showed a 0.9×0.5×1.3 cm3 hyperechoic solid lesion with distal shadowing within the subcutaneous tissue of the anterior abdominal wall. The X-ray did not show any calcification within the subcutaneous tissue which ruled out metastatic calcified lesions. The patient was referred to general surgery for further evaluation. A previous computed tomography (CT) revealed a nonspecific 12 mm lesion involving the skin and subcutaneous fat in the right upper quadrant of the anterior abdominal wall. The lesion was excised under local anesthesia and sent for histopathological analysis. CD68 highlighted the multitude of macrophages microscopically. Histopathology demonstrated CKAE1/AE3 was negative for any epithelial components and S100 was diffusely positive. A final diagnosis of GCT was made. On follow-up, the patient underwent excision of the scar tissue with no evidence of atypia or GCT. This case is unique due to its benign presentation and limited reported literature. Further evaluation of a painless subcutaneous lesion is imperative to rule out rare conditions and the possibility of recurrent or metastatic malignancy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".