MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414529252 · doi:10.3390/jof11100697

The Diagnostic Challenge of a False-Positive Cryptococcal Antigen in Chronic Meningitis with Suspected Indolent CNS B-Cell Lymphoproliferative Neoplasm

2025· article· en· W4414529252 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammadreza R. Shahmirzadi, Melissa H. Fowler, Lise Bondy, Seth Climans, Jonathan C. Lau, Eric To, Yiannis Iordanous, My Thao Phung, Fatimah AlMutawa, Jeffrey Fuller, Michael E. Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fungi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptococcal meningitisLumbar punctureCryptococcosisMeningitisCerebrospinal fluidLymphoproliferative disordersAmphotericin BFluconazolePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 47-year-old woman presented with a two-year history of progressive visual symptoms and headaches. Lumbar puncture revealed lymphocytic pleocytosis, elevated protein, low glucose, and a CSF CrAg titer of 1:256. She was treated empirically for cryptococcal meningitis with amphotericin B, flucytosine, and fluconazole for 15 months. Her symptoms persisted, and repeated CSF and serum CrAg, fungal cultures, and an extensive infectious workup were negative. CSF flow cytometry eventually demonstrated a monoclonal B-cell population suggestive of a lymphoproliferative process. Imaging, including MRI and PET scans, did not reveal systemic disease. A ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt was placed for symptom management. This case emphasizes the limitations of CrAg testing and the potential for false positives. It underscores the need for integrating clinical, laboratory, and imaging data when evaluating chronic meningitis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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 venueJournal of FungiSame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207