MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317989842 · doi:10.1136/jcp-2022-208651

Cystic neutrophilic granulomatous mastitis: sensitivity and specificity of 16s rRNA and Sanger sequencing for <i>Corynebacterium</i> spp

2023· article· en· W4317989842 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen Yang, Robert Kozak, Sharon Nofech‐Mozes, Elsa Salvant, Ekaterina Olkhov‐Mitsel, Elzbieta Slodkowska, Anna Plotkin, Wedad Hanna, Fang‐I Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Lesions and Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorynebacteriumMicrobiologySanger sequencingMastitisBiology16S ribosomal RNAGranulomatous mastitisPathologyMedicineDNA sequencingBacteriaGeneticsDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims Cystic neutrophilic granulomatous mastitis (CNGM) is a subtype of granulomatous mastitis (GM) associated with Corynebacterium spp infection. We aimed to analyse the prevalence of Corynebacteria in CNGM and non-CNGM cases. Methods Breast specimens diagnosed as granulomatous inflammation between 2010 and 2020 were reviewed to identify a CNGM cohort and a non-CNGM cohort. Polymerase chain reaction-based identification of Corynebacteria by 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) primers, followed by confirmatory Sanger sequencing (SS), was performed on all cases. Clinical, radiological and microbiology data were retrieved from the electronic patient records. Results Twenty-eight CNGM cases and 19 non-CNGM cases were identified. Compared with the non-CNGM cohort, patients in the CNGM cohort were more likely to be multiparous (p=0.01), breast feeding (p=0.01) and presenting with a larger breast mass (p&lt;0.01), spontaneous drainage (p=0.05) and skin irritation (p&lt;0.01). No significant difference in the prevalence of Corynebacteria between the cohorts (7% vs 11%, p=0.68) by microbiological culture was identified. Compared with microbiology culture, the sensitivity and specificity of each Corynebacterial detection method were 50% and 81% for Gram stain, and 25% and 100% for 16S rRNA combined with SS. Regardless of the diagnosis, patients positive for Corynebacteria were more likely to have a persistent disease (p&lt;0.01). Conclusion CNGM presents as a large symptomatic breast mass in multiparous breastfeeding women. The importance of adequate sampling and repeated microbiology culture in conjunction with sequencing on all GM cases with persistent disease is paramount.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicBreast Lesions and CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207