MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194506071 · doi:10.36106/ijsr/1501236

A CASE REPORT AND LITERATURE REVIEW: METACHRONOUS TUMOUR IN SINGLE PATIENT (CARCINOMA CERVIX AND CARCINOMA LUNG)

2021· article· en· W3194506071 on OpenAlexaff
S Thamizholi, Ranu Chourasia, Pearly Daimari, Balakyntiew Kharshandi

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Care Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarboplatinCarcinomaStage (stratigraphy)RadiologyLung cancerChemotherapyBiopsyLungCervixCancerInternal medicineCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: - Multiple primary tumors can be synchronous when detected simultaneously (or) metachronous when detected after a variable time interval. Association of two cancer in same patient is unusual but has been widely reported in the literature. CASE PRESENTAION: - A 55-year-old women was diagnosed in December 2018 as squamous cell carcinoma cervix FIGO STAGE IIIB & she received denitive chemoradiation 46GY/23# for 5 weeks with 5 cycles weekly injection carboplatin under AUC 2 followed by Brachytherapy and completed treatment in February 2019. She was on regular follow up till December 2020. Later she presented with upper back pain. She was evaluated for the same. CT Thorax suggestive of right upper lobe lung mass and PET- CT S/O Right Lung mass lesion with extension into spinal rd th canal & lytic destruction of D2/D3 Vertebrae and Right 3 , 4 rib. CT guided Biopsy s/o squamous cell carcinoma with IHC- p16 & p40-Positive, nd TTF-Negative and diagnosed as 2 primary carcinoma lung Stage IV. She received 6 cycles systemic chemotherapy completed in May 2021. She improved clinically & radiologically with systemic chemotherapy paclitaxel & carboplatin. CONCLUSION: - Metachronous tumor in single patient is unusual & management depends on stage of presentation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHSame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207