Gynecologic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
to selected 48 cases of renal carcinomas of various subtypes, 7 oncocytomas and 13 normal kidney. Histological examination focused on the presence of small branching glands, stromal cellularity, ovarian-type stroma, prominent vessels and estrogen and progesterone receptors. Results: This study included 26 CN and 13 MEST. Patient' age (53.2 vs 53.8 years) and tumor size (6.5 vs 6.8 cm) were similar between CN and MEST. CN predominantly affected women (male/female=2/24), while MEST exclusively affected female. CN and MEST had many similar histological features, including size of cysts, stromal cellularity, presence of ovarian-type stroma, calcification and hemorrhage. ER and PR were positive in 4/5 (80%) and 3/5 (60%) CN, and 5/8 (62.5%) and 5/7 (71.4%) MEST. However, prominent vessels (4/13, 30.8%) and small branching glands (53.8%) were exclusively seen in MEST (p=0.000). Clustering analysis demonstrated that CN and MEST had very similar molecular profiles (Figure Of differentially expressed genes that best distinguish CN/MEST from other subtypes of kidney tumors, the highest and lowest differentially expressed genes are insulin-like growth factor 2 and carbonic anhydrase II, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".