MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290973820 · doi:10.1111/neup.12857

Lactotroph <scp>PitNET</scp>/adenoma associated to granulomatous hypophysitis in a patient with Crohn's disease: A case report

2022· article· en· W4290973820 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Pietrantoni, Simona Serioli, Manuela Cominelli, Giovanni Lodoli, Roberto Stefini, Vincenzo Villanacci, Pietro Luigi Poliani

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropathology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity Research
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrohn's diseaseMedicinePituitary adenomaDiseaseHypophysitisProlactinomaAdenomaPathologyProlactinInternal medicinePituitary glandHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Granulomatous hypophysitis is a rare and poorly understood condition. Although certain cases are treated as primary pituitary autoimmune disorders, rare cases may be associated with pituitary neuroendocrine tumours (PitNETs) and systemic inflammatory diseases. Here, we report a case of a 47-year-old man that underwent endoscopic trans-sphenoidal excision of a pituitary mass diagnosed as PitNET. On histologic evaluation, the neoplasm showed an admixture of granulomas with extensive inflammatory infiltrate and lactotroph PitNET/adenoma. Careful anamnestic examination revealed a diagnosis of Crohn's disease 20 years prior. Although rarely done, both PitNET and Crohn's disease may be associated with granulomatous hypophysitis, and our patient had both conditions. During the 6-year follow-up, PitNETs and hypophysitis did not recur, while Crohn's disease was only partially controlled by medical therapy. To our knowledge, this is the first description of association of granulomatous hypophysitis, PitNET and Crohn's disease.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropathologySame topicSarcoidosis and Beryllium Toxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207