MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386946364 · doi:10.1097/pcr.0000000000000329

Large B-Cell Lymphoma With IRF4 Rearrangement: From Theory to Practice

2019· article· en· W4386946364 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Vincent, Steven Richebourg, Stéphanie Cloutier, Mélanie Fortin, Simon Jacob, Mohamed Amin-Hashem

Bibliographic record

VenueAJSP Review and Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIRF4LymphomaBiologyInterferon regulatory factorsGene rearrangementCancer researchTranscription factorBCL6B cellGeneGeneticsImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Interferon regulatory factor 4 ( IRF4 ) rearrangement is a common cytogenetic anomaly reported in various neoplastic lymphoproliferative disorders. IRF4 is a gene located on chromosome 6 that encodes for the IRF4 protein belonging to the IRF family of transcription factors. Large B-cell lymphoma with IRF4 rearrangement constitutes a novel provisional entity included in the classification of lymphoid tissue recently proposed by the World Health Organization in its fourth revised edition. This rare entity, with a specific clinical presentation, is defined by the presence of a rearrangement of the IRF4 gene. We report a rare case of a 19-year-old female patient presenting with a large B-cell lymphoma with IRF4 rearrangement located in the right tonsil, with characteristic histologic appearance and the phenotype of neoplastic cells. The presence of an IGH-IRF4 rearrangement was also confirmed, using a fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis with 2 successive hybridizations on the same slide. Patient was treated with 6 cycles of R-CHOP with no evidence of recurrence.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAJSP Review and ReportsSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207