MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413138148 · doi:10.4103/aian.aian_1123_24

Sugar-Coating or Zuckerguss Appearance on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis in a Patient with Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2025· article· en· W4413138148 on OpenAlexaff
Lisle Blackbourn, Usha Sree Janapala

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Indian Academy of Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyeloid leukemiaMagnetic resonance imagingLeukemiaPathologyRadiologyCancer researchInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 65-year-old woman with a known past medical history of Bell’s palsy, hypothyroidism, migraines, acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with mutations of NPM1 and FLT3, currently being treated with azacitidine and venetoclax, who also had leukemia cutis as a past complication of her AML, presented to the hospital with worsening daily headaches, dizziness, right arm weakness, and slurred speech. Since her headache was different from her usual migraines, along with new neurologic deficits, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain with and without contrast was performed. It showed contrast-enhancing lesions in a “sugar coating,” “caking,” or “zuckerguss” appearance that is classically seen in leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, as seen in Figure 1. MRI of the complete spinal cord with and without contrast showed leptomeningeal enhancement of the upper spinal cord; enhancement of the pia arachnoid/intrathecal contents of the distal thoracic spinal cord involving the pia arachnoid, with extension to the conus; and “caking” of enhancement of the descending nerve roots with clustering of the descending nerve roots, as seen in Figure 2. A lumbar puncture (LP) was then performed, with normal glucose, a slightly elevated protein (106 mg/dL), and a total nucleated cell count of 218 per mm3. All cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) infectious testing was negative, and CSF flow cytometry confirmed relapsed AML. Pathology also showed atypical cells that were suspicious for blasts.Figure 1: (a-d) MRI brain with and without contrast showing contrast-enhancing lesions in a “sugar coating,” “caking,” or “zuckerguss” appearance in leptomeningeal carcinomatosis. MRI: magnetic resonance imagingFigure 2: (a-d) MRI of the complete spinal axis with and without contrast showing leptomeningeal enhancement of the upper spinal cord; enhancement of the pia arachnoid/intrathecal contents of the distal thoracic spinal cord involving the pia arachnoid with extension to the conus; and “caking” of enhancement of the descending nerve roots with clustering of the descending nerve roots. MRI: magnetic resonance imagingThe main differential diagnosis of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is infectious causes, and thus, MRI of the brain and spine and LP are essential to make the diagnosis and exclude other causes.[1] Clinical signs of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis can include focal neurologic deficits, cranial nerve palsies, seizures, encephalopathy, and signs of increased intracranial pressure such as headache.[1,2] Other manifestations in the central nervous system (CNS) of AML can include leukemic vasculitis, CNS hemorrhage, and spinal cord compression.[3] The incidence of AML involving the CNS is unknown, however, one study found that 3.3% of patients had CNS involvement during the course of their disease.[4] It is also thought to be less common than that found in adult cases of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). There is some belief that the incidence of CNS involvement could approach 20% if a LP was performed in all AML patients at the time of diagnosis.[4] Due to the suspected low incidence of AML and CNS involvement, a LP is not done unless patients exhibit neurological deficits. Five to ten percent of adult AML cases can also have leukemia cutis, which is when there are cutaneous manifestations in any type of leukemia[5,6] In those with AML and leukemia cutis, extramedullary leukemic involvement in the CNS is seen in about 17% of cases and is the most common site of extramedullary leukemic involvement in this population.[7] Declaration of patient consent Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and accompanying figures. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 venueAnnals of Indian Academy of NeurologySame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207