MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408746690 · doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2025.03.006

Plexiform ameloblastoma: a potential diagnostic challenge

2025· article· en· W4408746690 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michelle Huang, Grace Bradley, Bayardo Perez‐Ordoñez, Hagen Klieb, Nick Blanas, Marco Magalhaes

Bibliographic record

VenueOral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral and Maxillofacial Pathology
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineAmeloblastomaPathologyOrthodonticsMaxilla

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Ameloblastoma is a benign, locally aggressive neoplasm of the jaws. Accurate diagnosis is important for providing timely treatment and reducing the risk of recurrence and local destruction. The criteria for diagnosing ameloblastoma are well-defined, however, rare cases have been observed with a multicystic/unicystic plexiform pattern that lacks pathognomonic histologic features, causing difficulties in differentiating them from less aggressive jaw lesions. Our main objective was to review these plexiform ameloblastomas that could prove challenging for pathologists on incisional biopsies. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed cases of ameloblastoma in the University of Toronto diagnostic biopsy service from 2004 to 2024, n = 200. Cases with a microscopic description of cystic plexiform epithelial proliferation were retrieved for analysis of histopathologic features, clinical and radiographic information. RESULTS: A rare subset of ameloblastoma (4%, 8 of 200) presented a distinctive histologic appearance of cystic plexiform proliferation lacking ameloblast-like cells, but clinical and radiographic features characteristic of ameloblastoma. Immunohistochemical staining for the BRAF p.V600E mutation was positive in 7 of 8 cases, demonstrating the importance of BRAF testing to aid in diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights an uncommon and potentially challenging histologic pattern of ameloblastoma for which a coordinated approach using clinical, radiographic, histologic, and molecular studies are needed for timely and accurate diagnosis.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology and Oral RadiologySame topicOral and Maxillofacial PathologyFrench-language works237,207