MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390197378 · doi:10.30683/1927-7229.2023.12.11

Marjolins Ulcer: Clinicopathological Profile and Treatment Patterns

2023· article· en· W4390197378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
B.R. Kiran Kumar, Geeta S. Narayanan, M. S. Ganesh, Amritha Prabha Shankar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdjuvant radiotherapyScarsRadiation therapyBasal cellRetrospective cohort studySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Marjolins ulcer is a malignant transformation arising from chronic ulcers or previously traumatized scars that occur usually after burns. This article aims to study the clinicopathological profile and treatment patterns of Marjolins ulcer.
 Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of all Marjolins ulcer patients presented to Vydehi Cancer Centre from 2018 to 2021 was done. A total of 27 patients of all age groups were included in the study. All information regarding detailed history, clinical examination, treatment details were retrospectively collected and analysed.
 Results: Most of the patients were in the 5th decade of life with an overall male preponderance. The most common cause for Marjolins ulcer was Burns scars followed by Trauma. Lower extremities were found to be the most predominant site. The mean latency period for the development of Marjolins ulcer was 11 years. Squamous cell carcinoma was the most common histological subtype, Adjuvant Radiotherapy was given to the patients with high-risk features.
 Conclusion: Chronic non-healing ulcers that do not respond to treatment should be carefully examined for malignant transformation. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment and Adjuvant Radiotherapy should be considered in high-risk cases to reduce locoregional 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207