MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411342187 · doi:10.1159/000545827

Kaposi Sarcoma Presenting as Retroperitoneal Lymphadenopathy: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4411342187 on OpenAlexaff
Karam Elsolh, Kevin Zbuk, Haroon Yousuf

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsJuravinski Cancer CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcomaLymphatic diseaseInguinal lymphadenopathyDermatologyPathologyRadiologyBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Kaposi sarcoma is a mesenchymal vascular tumor caused by human gammaherpesvirus 8. Kaposi sarcoma is typically associated with immunocompromise and HIV, and has a classical form seen in elderly men of Mediterranean or Eastern European ethnic origin. We herein present an atypical case of Kaposi sarcoma presenting as retroperitoneal adenopathy in an immunocompetent, non-Mediterranean patient. Case Presentation: A previously healthy 53-year-old patient presented to the emergency department with lower abdominal pain and was found to have isolated retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy on abdominal imaging, later confirmed to be Kaposi sarcoma on biopsy. The patient presented without typical cutaneous findings of Kaposi sarcoma or any risk factors for the disease, including HIV, immunocompromise, or Mediterranean descent. The patient was referred to medical oncology and has had spontaneous regression of adenopathy in the absence of any treatment. Conclusion: Our review of the case and of the literature demonstrates the many atypical ways in which KS can present. Our case highlights the importance of considering KS in the differential diagnosis for visceral lymphadenopathy in the absence of solid tumor pathology. Lastly, our case brings to light the variable clinical course of KS, which can range from minimal to explosive growth to spontaneous regression.

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)0.002
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 topicViral-associated cancers and disordersFrench-language works237,207