MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399221811 · doi:10.1080/1120009x.2024.2359838

Elevated CK from immune checkpoint inhibitor- related hypophysitis: a case report

2024· article· en· W4399221811 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmine Gill, John Walker, Carrie Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemotherapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypophysitisMedicineCancer researchInternal medicinePituitary gland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have emerged to the forefront of management for various advanced cancers, such as melanoma, lung cancer and renal cell carcinoma. Immune checkpoints such as CTLA-4 and PD-1 serve to inhibit T cell activation and signaling; therefore through blockade of these pathways, ICIs promote anti-tumour immune activation. However, as a result of T cell disinhibition, ICIs have been reported to cause immune related adverse events (irAEs) affecting numerous organ systems. One of the most serious and potentially life-threatening irAE is inflammatory myositis. Myositis, which generally presents with progressive proximal muscle weakness and elevated serum creatine kinase (CK), has been reported in <1% of patients who have received ICI therapy. A rare cause of elevated CK is adrenal insufficiency, which has been reported in up to 6% of ICI users. Here we report a case of ICI-related hypophysitis related myopathy that was initially misdiagnosed as ICI-associated inflammatory myositis. This case illustrates the importance of considering a wide differential when assessing hyperCKemia in the setting of ICI use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ChemotherapySame topicMuscle and Compartmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207