Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary breast cancer occurring in accessory breast tissue is exceptionally rare, with an incidence of 0.2-0.6%. It can aggressively progress, often leading to early metastasis. Treatment is typically delayed due to the rarity, variety of differentials, and lack of clinical awareness of the disease. In axillary surgery, sentinel lymph node mapping in patients with axillary breast cancer is technically challenging and has been poorly described. Here, we present a case of a 53-year-old woman with a 0.5 × 1 cm hard lump in the right axillary region for 2 years, progressive growth for 6 months, and no concomitant breast lesion or axillary lymphadenopathy. Core needle biopsy revealed invasive ductal carcinoma with estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negativity, whereas mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging revealed no primary breast lesions. She was diagnosed with invasive cancer arising from an accessory breast and underwent wide total excision of the right accessory breast and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Sentinel lymph node biopsy can be successfully performed using intratumoral dye and subareolar radiocolloid mapping in accessory breast cancer surgery. Axillary accessory breast tissue is outside the scope of the screening breast examination; therefore, oncologists must be aware of this entity and associated pathologies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".