A160 A CASE OF BREAST CANCER METASTASIS MASQUERADING AS SIGNET RING CELL ADENOCARCINOMA OF THE STOMACH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Gastric cancer has a poor prognosis, particularly at advanced stages. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be used to treat selected early-stage gastric cancers. This case study explores the challenge of diagnosing and managing patients when metastatic lesions mimic primary gastric cancer, as seen in this case of breast cancer metastasis resembling signet ring cell adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Aims The aim of this case report is to describe an unusual case of breast cancer metastasis to the stomach identified unexpectedly on random gastric biopsies, initially diagnosed as a primary gastric signet ring cell adenocarcinoma. Methods Clinical and pathological records of the described patient were reviewed retrospectively. Furthermore, a review of the relevant literature was also performed. Results A 68 year-old-woman underwent gastroscopy for nausea and vomiting. Her past medical history was remarkable for bilateral mastectomies ten years ago for invasive lobular carcinoma, with metastatic bone disease diagnosed by imaging five years prior. She had been well controlled on letrozole taken intermittently due to side effects. At endoscopy, while the stomach appeared grossly normal, random biopsies done for Helicobacter pylori identified a single focus of signet ring cell adenocarcinoma. Subsequent chromoendoscopy identified an area of subtle mucosal abnormality for which the patient declined surgery and was instead managed by ESD which surprisingly yielded no dysplasia. A follow up gastroscopy with random biopsies also failed to identify any areas of dysplasia, but random biopsies on a subsequent gastroscopy again identified a minute focus of adenocarcinoma with signet ring cell morphology. Given the unusual presentation of apparent signet ring cell adenocarcinoma in two distinct areas in the stomach without any visible endoscopic abnormality an in-depth pathological analysis was conducted. By immunohistochemistry the tumor cells stained positive for Estrogen Receptor, GATA3, and CK7 and negative for antibodies targeting CK20 and CDX2, which supported an interpretation of minute multifocal breast cancer metastases to the stomach from hematogenous spread. Conclusions In this case, repeated endoscopic investigations and immunohistochemical staining revealed minute multifocal breast cancer metastases to the stomach. Conventional tumor staging methods often cannot identify microscopic metastases, potentially impacting disease progression and patient care. A high level of suspicion for metastatic breast cancer and a detailed pathological analysis allowed for the correct diagnosis in this patient. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".