Acute appendicitis secondary to metastatic breast cancer. 12 Years after first primary tumor diagnosis. A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Metastatic adenocarcinoma to the appendix is an uncommon finding, there are few published cases in the literature of appendicitis from metastatic breast carcinoma. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 51-year-old female was admitted to the emergency department with a presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis with a past medical history of stage IV Breast Cancer 12 years ago. Appendectomy was performed, finding a perforated appendix. Anatomo-pathology examination revealed a semi-differentiated carcinoma involving the tip of the appendix. DISCUSSION: Gastrointestinal tract (GIT) metastases of breast carcinoma are an uncommon finding. Appendiceal metastases are a very uncommon finding, and the interval between diagnosis of the primary carcinoma and the metastases can be many years. There are no reports about whether right hemicolectomy provides better oncological outcomes than an appendectomy in stage IV BC. CONCLUSION: There are no guidelines for the management of this disease but unquestionably, multidisciplinary management leads to better outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| 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".