Ocular toxicity following carboplatin chemotherapy for neuroendocrine tumour of the bladder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Carboplatin is a commonly used platinum analogue chemotherapeutic agent that is similar to cisplatin but is known to be better tolerated. This case report outlines a case of ocular toxicity following carboplatin chemotherapy used for the management of a neuroendocrine tumour of the bladder. CASE REPORT: A 70-year-old man with a history of neuroendocrine bladder cancer underwent chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide. He presented 4 weeks following his fourth chemotherapy cycle with a 1-week history of right eye blurriness. The patient had suffered a similar episode 2 weeks following his third chemotherapy cycle in his left eye. Carboplatin-induced ocular toxicity was suspected and his vision remained stable following cessation of carboplatin chemotherapy. DISCUSSION: Current literature on carboplatin-induced ocular toxicity remains scanty, however, previous cases have reported symptoms beginning 5 days to 2 weeks following carboplatin use. Visual disturbance in the form of altered colour vision, blind spot, blurred vision and metamorphopsia have been reported by previous literature. This case report emphasised a case of bilateral sequential blurring of vision following carboplatin chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: It remains critical for ophthalmologists and oncologists to look out for ocular side effects of chemotherapy due to its devastating effects.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".