MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294808804 · doi:10.1080/21681805.2022.2119273

<sup>99m</sup> Tc-Sestamibi SPECT/CT and histopathological features of oncocytic renal neoplasia

2022· article· en· W4294808804 on OpenAlexaff
Antonios Tzortzakakis, Thomas Papathomas, Ove Gustafsson, Stefan Gabrielson, Kiril Trpkov, Linnea Ekström-Ehn, Alexandros Arvanitis, Maria Holstensson, Mattias Karlsson, Georgia Kokaraki, Rimma Axelsson

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Urology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncocytomaTechnetium Tc 99m SestamibiChromophobe cellNuclear medicineRenal cell carcinomaRadiologyParenchymaBiopsyKidneyPathologyClear cellScintigraphyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background 99mTc-Sestamibi Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography (SPECT/CT) contributes to the non-invasive differentiation of renal oncocytoma (RO) from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by characterising renal tumours as Sestamibi positive or Sestamibi negative regarding their 99mTc-Sestamibi uptake compared to the non-tumoral renal parenchyma.Purpose To determine whether 99mTc- Sestamibi uptake in renal tumour and the non-tumoral renal parenchyma measured using Standard Uptake Value (SUV) SPECT, has a beneficial role in differentiating RO from RCC.Material and Methods Fifty-seven renal tumours from 52 patients were evaluated. In addition to visual evaluation of 99mTc-Sestamibi uptake, SUVmax measurements were performed in the renal tumour and the ipsilateral non-tumoral renal parenchyma. Analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve identified an optimal cut-off value for detecting RO, based on the relative ratio of 99mTc- Sestamibi uptake.Results Semiquantitative evaluation of 99mTc-Sestamibi uptake did not improve the performance of 99mTc- Sestamibi SPECT/CT in detecting RO. 99mTc- Sestamibi SPECT/CT identifies a group of mostly indolent Sestamibi-positive tumours with low malignant potential containing RO, Low-Grade Oncocytic Tumours, Hybrid Oncocytic Tumours, and a subset of chromophobe RCCs.Conclusion The imaging limitations for accurate differentiation of Sestamibi-positive renal tumours mirror the recognised diagnostic complexities of the histopathologic evaluation of oncocytic neoplasia. Patients with Sestamibi-positive renal tumours could be better suited for biopsy and follow-up, according to the current active surveillance protocols.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of UrologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207