A Rare Case of Lobular Carcinoma in Situ Within a Fibroadenoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Fibroadenomas (FAs) are common benign breast tumors which account for 68% of all breast masses. They can be divided into simple and complex FAs. Though unusual, FAs can harbor invasive or in situ carcinomas, as well as high risk lesions such as lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) as we present in this case report.Case Presentation: In this case report, we are presenting a rare case of LCIS within a FA with a brief description of presentation, classification and radiological features.Conclusion: Carcinomas within FAs remain a diagnostic challenge. Despite being considered benign, FAs should still be closely monitored by ultrasound (US) as they can still harbor in situ or invasive carcinomas or high-risk lesions, including LCIS. Radiologists should always be aware and consider these as part of their differential diagnosis whenever benign looking masses have atypical features or presentation. The current management of LCIS detected within FA is still similar to LCIS found elsewhere in the breast.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".