MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386525594 · doi:10.3390/cancers15184450

Morphea, Eosinophilic Fasciitis and Cancer: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4386525594 on OpenAlexaff
Maxine Joly-Chevrier, Alexa Gélinas, Stephanie Ghazal, Sarah Moussa, Catherine McCuaïg, Maryam Piram, Alexandra Mereniuk, Ivan V. Litvinov, Mohammed Osman, Kevin Pehr, Elena Netchiporouk

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Disorders and Syndromes
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcGill UniversityHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorpheaEosinophilic fasciitisMedicineDermatologySkin cancerMalignancyCancerFasciitisInternal medicineSurgeryLichen sclerosus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morphea is an autoimmune fibrotic skin disease. Eosinophilic fasciitis (EF) is considered to belong to the severe spectrum of morphea. We conducted a scoping review assessing the risk of secondary cancer among morphea/EF patients, paraneoplastic morphea/EF and morphea/EF developing secondary to cancer therapy. The search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane databases for articles published from inception to September 2022 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines with no language or date restrictions. Two hundred and one studies were included. Of these, 32 studies reported on secondary cancer in morphea/EF patients, 45 on paraneoplastic morphea/EF and 125 on cancer-treatment-induced morphea/EF. While the current evidence remains limited, data suggest an increased risk of secondary cutaneous and possibly pancreatic malignancy in morphea patients, particularly the generalized subtype. There were insufficient data for EF. On the other hand, paraneoplastic morphea was anecdotal, whereas several observational studies suggested that ~10% of EF cases may be paraneoplastic, primarily in the context of hematologic malignancies. Radiotherapy-induced morphea is rare, seen in ~0.2% of treated patients and is usually localized to the treatment site, except in patients with pre-existing autoimmunity. While chemotherapy-induced cases are reported, immunotherapy morphea/EF cases are emerging and are preferentially seen with PD-1 and not CTLA-4 inhibitors. This study is limited by the type of articles included (case reports, case series and observational studies), and hence, additional research on this important topic is needed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicEosinophilic Disorders and SyndromesFrench-language works237,207