MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205403301 · doi:10.1093/jscr/rjab576

A case of incidental STUMP discovery in a patient with concurrent prostatic adenocarcinoma

2021· article· en· W4205403301 on OpenAlexaff
Tessa Ladner, Troy D. Schultz, Jocelyn Moore, Greg Houle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Case Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrologic and reproductive health conditions
Canadian institutionsKelowna General HospitalVernon Jubilee HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatic adenocarcinomaAdenocarcinomaGeneral surgeryOncologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stromal tumours of the prostate are exceedingly rare, often presenting in patients in their fifth decade of life. They are classified as either stromal sarcomas, or stromal tumours of uncertain malignant potential (STUMP), the latter of which is known to have diverse clinical behaviour and thus surgical excision is often warranted. We present a case of a 71-year-old male, initially worked up by his family doctor due to mild obstructive voiding symptoms. Following a more thorough urologic workup, including a prostate biopsy, he was found to have a markedly elevated prostate specific antigen and positive cores on prostate biopsy demonstrating prostatic adenocarcinoma. The decision was made to treat with retropubic radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection. Resulting pathology showed concurrent prostatic adenocarcinoma in addition to STUMP. The patient continues to be followed by oncology as well as a sarcoma specialist due to the unique nature of his case.

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)0.006
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
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 venueJournal of Surgical Case ReportsSame topicUrologic and reproductive health conditionsFrench-language works237,207