MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220942949 · doi:10.1002/vrc2.358

Bilateral trigeminal neuropathy associated with multicentric lymphoma in two dogs: Clinical presentation, MRI findings and flow cytometry characteristics

2022· article· en· W4220942949 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alenka Lavra Zajc, Harry Warwick, Chantal Rosa, Jessica R. Grant, Mary Marrington

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Record Case Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphomaMagnetic resonance imagingPathologyImmunophenotypingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A 6‐year‐old, female, neutered crossbreed and a 6.5‐year‐old, male, neutered Labrador retriever presented with oral dysphagia. Both dogs underwent investigations, including magnetic resonance imaging of the head, cytology and immunophenotyping. A diagnosis of stage Vb multicentric B‐cell lymphoma with plasmacytoid differentiation, likely Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia with bilateral trigeminal neuropathy, Horner's syndrome and paraneoplastic hypercalcaemia was obtained in the first case. In the second case, a diagnosis of stage Vb multicentric high‐grade T‐cell lymphoma with bilateral trigeminal neuropathy and suspected paraneoplastic polycythaemia was obtained. There was no evidence of central nervous system involvement in either case. There are very few previous reports of non‐idiopathic bilateral trigeminal neuropathy secondary to multicentric lymphoma, and to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first report describing the phenotypic and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics.

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary Record Case ReportsSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207