Paraneoplastic sensorimotor neuropathy and ventral cauda equina nerve root enhancement as initial presentation of small cell lung carcinoma: a case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes (PNS) are rare, however, are important to recognize as oftentimes they precede the detection of an occult malignancy. Our case highlights a rare circumstance of paraneoplastic radiculoneuropathy and the importance of recognizing PNS in antibody negative disease, as is the case in up to 16% of sensory neuronopathies, and the process of excluding other etiologies. CASE PRESENTATION: We discuss a 51-year-old man who presented with asymmetric subacute sensorimotor deficits in the lower limbs. Initial clinical examination showed weakness throughout the right lower limb and normal strength on the left with objective numbness in a mixed dermatomal and stocking-glove distribution. Electrophysiology was consistent with axonal sensorimotor neuropathy. Cerebrospinal fluid showed pleocytosis and elevated protein. Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment was given with some improvement in pain symptoms but no measurable motor improvement. Following clinical and electrophysiologic deterioration the patient was transferred to a tertiary centre. Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine showed smooth enhancement of the ventral caudal nerve roots. Chest computed tomography revealed left lower vascular scarring. Further positron emission tomography scan imaging identified fluorodeoxyglucose avid right lung lymphadenopathy. Bronchoscopy-guided biopsy revealed small cell lung carcinoma. Onconeural and antiganglioside antibodies were negative. The patient was then transferred to a medical oncology ward where he underwent chemoradiotherapy and subsequently experienced improvement in his motor function, supporting that his neurological condition was indeed secondary to a paraneoplastic process. CONCLUSIONS: Onconeural negative paraneoplastic radiculoneuropathy can precede diagnosis of small cell lung carcinoma. If considered early and adequately investigated, it can allow earlier diagnosis and treatment of underlying malignancy, improving overall and neurological prognosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".