Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma: The Giant Type
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs) are very rare tumors that arise in the large space of the retroperitoneum. About two-third of these tumors are malignant, of which soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is the most common and comprises almost one-third of malignant RPTs. Twenty to thirty percent of RPTs are benign. The retroperitoneal cavity has a very large potential space for tumor enlargement to a very high diameters without causing specific symptoms, especially during the initial phase of tumor enlargement. On diagnosis, the average tumor weight is 15 - 20 kg and tumor diameter is 20 - 25 cm. The most common retroperitoneal sarcoma type is liposarcoma, which account for 20% of all sarcoma types and 40% of all retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPSs). Other less common STS arise in the retroperitoneum include leiomyosarcoma and undifferentiated pleomorphic type. Giant liposarcoma is usually defined either as tumor diameter of 30 cm or more or tumor weight of 20 kg or higher. This specific type of sarcoma is very uncommon, with few case reports published in the English literature. Herein, we present a case of a healthy 33-year-old male patient, who was admitted due to abdominal distension and increased body weight since few months. An abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scan demonstrated a giant retroperitoneal mass of almost 40 cm in diameter in its largest dimension, located in the right retroperitoneal space. Ultrasound (US)-guided fine needle biopsy (FNB) was consistent with well differentiated liposarcoma. Surgical resection of the tumor along with the right colon, right ureter and kidney, third and fourth duodenal parts and part of the right iliopsoas muscle was contemplated. Histopathological report revealed well-differentiated liposarcoma of 50 cm in diameter, with foci of dedifferentiation, presented by pleomorphic sarcoma. Surgical margins were microscopically negative.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".