Synchronous surgery and immediate reconstruction of double primary cancers of the ovary and breast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There has been an ongoing debate about the benefits and risks between synchronous surgery and two independent surgery of ovary tumor removal and breast reconstruction. Here we report a synchronous oncological surgery and immediate postmastectomy reconstruction of double primary cancers of the ovary and breast. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 58-year-old woman presented with a right breast lump and ascites. DIAGNOSIS: Computed tomography (CT) indicated synchronous breast and ovarian cancer with multiple metastases. Double primary mammary and ovarian cancer was confirmed after a series of evaluations, such as core needle biopsy of the breast tumor. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES: Synchronous surgery and immediate reconstruction of double primary cancers of the ovary and breast were performed. Post-operative results showed complete resection of ovarian tumor, no post-operative complication, and excellent life quality. CONCLUSION: Synchronous surgery is warranted as a treatment option for selected cases of double primary cancer. The surgery not only achieved complete removal of one cancer and reduction of the other but also reached excellent breast reconstruction and body shape recovery.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".