MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197763879 · doi:10.3390/curroncol28050292

Complex Differential Diagnosis between Primary Breast Cancer and Breast Metastasis from EGFR-Mutated Lung Adenocarcinoma: Case Report and Literature Review

2021· review· en· W3197763879 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carmine Valenza, Francesca Porta, Alessandra Rappa, Elena Guerini‐Rocco, Giuseppe Viale, Massimo Barberis, Filippo de Marinis, Giuseppe Curigliano, Chiara Catania

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMetastasis and carcinoma case studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerGefitinibMetastasisDifferential diagnosisAdenocarcinomaEstrogen receptorEpidermal growth factor receptorLungOncologyPathologyLung cancerProgesterone receptorCA15-3Internal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a case of a woman with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated lung adenocarcinoma who received gefitinib for 2 years and obtained a partial response. The patient then developed liver metastasis and a breast lesion, displaying high estrogen receptor (ER) expression and harboring the same EGFR mutation. From the radiological studies, it was not possible to make a differential diagnosis between primary breast cancer and breast metastasis from lung cancer. After the removal of the breast nodule, thanks to the clinical history, radiology, and above all, molecular and immunohistochemical investigations, a diagnosis of breast metastasis from lung adenocarcinoma was made. This case emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive clinical, pathological, and molecular analysis in the differential diagnosis between primary breast cancer and metastases from extramammary tumor to guide adequate treatment decision making.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicMetastasis and carcinoma case studiesFrench-language works237,207