[Artículo traducido] Bloques celulares obtenidos de la punción-aspiración con aguja fina ecoguiada: rendimiento diagnóstico en una serie de 51 lesiones dermatológicas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La generación de bloques celulares (BC) obtenidos a partir de punción-aspiración con aguja fina guiada por ultrasonido (PAAFUS) es una técnica bien establecida en patología mamaria y tiroidea, pero rara vez se utiliza en dermatología. Revisamos los BC obtenidos por PAAFUS de lesiones cutáneas, que se clasificaron como tumores cutáneos malignos, tumores cutáneos benignos, tumores cutáneos inflamatorios o enfermedades cutáneas por depósito. El rendimiento diagnóstico de cada categoría se comparó con la histopatología. La PAAFUS de 51 lesiones cutáneas se procesó en BC. Hubo concordancia global entre la histopatología y los BC en el 84,31% de los casos. La concordancia entre histopatología y BC para lesiones cutáneas benignas, malignas e inflamatorias y por depósito fue del 69,2%, del 93,7% y del 86,3%, respectivamente. La generación de BC a partir de PAAFUS de lesiones cutáneas debe considerarse como parte del arsenal diagnóstico dermatológico. Se necesita más experiencia para comprender mejor para qué tipos de lesiones dermatológicas estaría claramente recomendado. The generation of cell blocks (CBs) obtained from ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsies (USFNAB) is a well-established technique in breast and thyroid pathology, but is rarely used in dermatology. We reviewed CBs obtained from USFNAB of skin lesions, which were categorized as malignant skin tumors, benign skin tumors, inflammatory skin tumors or deposit skin diseases. The diagnostic yield of each category was compared to histopathology. The USFNAB of 51 skin lesions was processed into CBs. There was overall agreement between histopathology and CBs in 84.31% of cases. Diagnostic group concordance for benign, malignant as well as inflammatory and deposit skin lesions were 69.2%, 93.7% and 86.3% respectively. Cell block generation from USFNAB aspirates of skin lesions should be considered as part of the dermatologic diagnostic armamentarium. Further experience is needed to better understand for which types of dermatologic lesions it would be clearly indicated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.015 |
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".