MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200479888 · doi:10.14740/gr1482

A Unique Coexistence of Rectal Adenocarcinoma and Gastric Antral Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: A Case Report and Minireview

2021· article· en· W4200479888 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahmoud R Hussein, Ahmed Mostafa Mohamed, Yahia Ibraheem Assiri, Nasser Ibraheem Alqahtani, Saeed A. Alqahtani, Hatim Mahgoub Ali, Asim Abdallah Ahmed Elyas, Mubarak Al‐Shraim, Syed Shamshad Hussain, Eman E. Abu‐Dief

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGiSTRectumStomachAdenocarcinomaWedge resectionStromal tumorInternal medicineGastroenterologyRadiologyStromal cellSurgeryCancerResection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have reported the coexistence of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) with many primary carcinomas such as gastric and renal cell carcinomas. However, to date reports about the coexistence of gastric GISTs and colorectal adenocarcinoma are limited. Herein we report a unique case of gastric GIST coexisting synchronously with rectal adenocarcinoma in a 36-year-old male patient who presented with weight loss, vomiting, and bleeding per rectum. Computed tomography (CT) revealed circumferential rectal mass coexistent with an irregular gastric soft tissue mass. The diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma and gastric GIST was established by immunohistological evaluation of the colonoscopic (rectum) and CT-guided (stomach) biopsies. The patient received concomitant chemoradiotherapy for the rectal adenocarcinoma and neoadjuvant imatinib for the gastric GIST. This was followed by low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision and wedge resection of the gastric mass. Follow-up of the patient for 1.5 years revealed no evidence of disease recurrence. We also present a minireview of the literature that provides insights into this subject as a separate section.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207