MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411342184 · doi:10.1159/000546842

Spontaneously Regressing Penile Extramammary Paget Disease without Recurrence of Primary Urothelial Carcinoma: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4411342184 on OpenAlexaff
Derrick Chong, Yvette Miller-Monthrope, Philip Doiron

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer and Skin Lesions
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExtramammary Paget's diseasePaget DiseaseUrothelial carcinomaCarcinomaUrologyDermatologyDiseasePathologyInternal medicineCancerBladder cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Secondary extramammary Paget disease (EMPD) is a rare cutaneous malignancy that typically manifests on apocrine-rich skin originating from an underlying adenocarcinoma. It has a low chance of further metastasizing and treatment is recommended. Case Presentation: We present a case of an 86-year-old man with a history of bladder carcinoma that was successfully treated and in remission for 4 years, who developed an asymptomatic rash on the glans penis. Histopathology and immunohistochemistry confirmed secondary EMPD of urothelial origin. Cancer screening was negative and this was declared secondary EMPD without recurrence of primary malignancy. The patient declined surgical and pharmacologic treatment. After 1 year, the lesion spontaneously resolved with no recurrence. Conclusion: Secondary EMPD can present without underlying malignancy and may spontaneously regress. This is a rare phenomenon and the mechanism is not yet known. We speculate that it may be related to adaptive immunity, local inflammation promoted by biopsy and that there was no underlying primary malignancy. Treatment decisions should be made in the context of thorough goals of care discussions. Further observation of this phenomenon is required to guide management plans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueCase Reports in OncologySame topicCancer and Skin LesionsFrench-language works237,207