MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401352842 · doi:10.3390/curroncol31080336

An Unusual Radiologic Image of Extensive Tumor Mass Infiltrating Hepatic Hilum without Signs of Cholestasis—A Case Report and a Literature Review of Non-Cancerous Lesions Mimicking Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

2024· review· en· W4401352842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jakub Ciesielka, Krzysztof Jakimów, Ida Cedrych, Anna Kwaśniewska, Jacek Pająk, Jerzy Chudek

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHilum (anatomy)CholestasisIntrahepatic CholangiocarcinomaPathologyRadiologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (mICC) is the most frequent type of ICC. In contrast-enhanced computed tomography, mICC is visualized as a hypodense lesion with distal dilatation of intrahepatic bile ducts. The presented case illustrates the unusual manifestation of mICC in a 71-year-old male patient, where despite the extensive tumor mass and the hilar infiltration, the dilatation of intrahepatic bile ducts and cholestasis were not noted. METHODS: A literature review on PubMed was performed. Primarily, 547 records were identified, and the titles and abstracts were systematically searched. Regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 31 papers describing the non-cancerous liver lesions mimicking ICC were included in the further analysis. RESULTS: In 41.9% of the analyzed non-cancerous lesions, the obstruction of the bile ducts was not noted, similar to our patient. A significant cholestasis has been found in 30.03% of analyzed patients. The invasion of the liver hilum was noted in one-third of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Atypical radiological features in lesions suspected of ICC, such as the absence of intrahepatic bile-duct dilation, are common in benign lesions. In the case of radiologically atypical lesions suspected of ICC, the diagnostic imaging needs to be correlated with clinical data, and the diagnosis should be confirmed with a pathological examination.

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)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.349 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207