MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409146559 · doi:10.33137/utmj.v102i1.42092

A Huge Primary Retroperitoneal Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4409146559 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vee Chuan Hoe, Sentilnathan Subramaniam, Jin‐Jiun Mah, Nornazirah Azizan, Firdaus Hayati

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Medical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaMedicineLymphomaPrimary (astronomy)PathologyRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retroperitoneal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is generally rare and often presents with late symptoms. A 60-year-old female presented with abdominal pain for 3 days with associated symptoms of altered bowel habits and constitutional symptoms. Physical examination was unremarkable. The blood investigations were generally within normal limits except for a 10-fold rise in serum CA-125. Transabdominal ultrasonography revealed an ill-defined lesion, with a cystic component within, at the inferior pole of the spleen. Computed tomography scan showed a large lobulated soft tissue tumour in the left retroperitoneal space with local infiltration to adjacent organs with multiple subcentimeter para-aortic and aortocaval lymph nodes. Laparotomy revealed a locally advanced retroperitoneal tumour measuring 10 x 10cm in size. The left retroperitoneal tumour was resected en-bloc with the left kidney, the spleen, the distal part of the pancreas and a part of the left diaphragm. Histopathological examination of the retroperitoneal tumour revealed a DLBCL (germinal centre type) as CD10, CD20, and BCL-6 were positive among all the markers, confirming the final diagnosis. She was started on CHOP regimen chemotherapy and is currently well. A complete en-bloc resection of the retroperitoneal lymphoma is recommended in fit patients with resectable retroperitoneal tumours. The decision between core needle biopsy and surgical resection should be made on a case-by-case basis following a multidisciplinary team approach discussion to achieve the best outcome for these patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Medical JournalSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207