MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416466590 · doi:10.30683/1927-7229.2025.14.13

Giant Multilobulated Breast Mass, an Uncommon Manifestation of Fibroadenoma: A Case Study and Review of the Literature

2025· article· W4416466590 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Adi Ashindoitiang, Theophilus Ipeh Ugbem, Joseph Esien Kooffreh, Maurice Efana Asuquo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Lesions and Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnucleationFibroadenomaPresentation (obstetrics)Rare diseaseGiant cellLactationMiscarriage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A giant multilobulated breast mass is a rare and significant presentation of fibroadenoma characterized by their considerable size, exceeding 5cm and their rapid progression, which frequently results in notable breast distortion. It can cause symptoms such as stretching of the skin with multiple dilated veins, nipple changes and even ulceration that may mimic malignancy. Presented is a case involving a 33-year-old woman with a giant multilobulated breast mass of 6 years duration noticed during lactation. Clinical, imaging and histological evaluation revealed a definitive diagnosis of a giant fibroadenoma. She was offered surgical enucleation with satisfactory outcome. Giant fibroadenoma is rare and may be noticed during lactation simulating malignancy. Hormonal changes during pregnancy and lactation can stimulate the growth of fibroadenoma.Timely histopathological validation through immunohistochemistry is crucial to prevent the unnecessary treatment of benign lesions that resemble malignant condition. Surgical intervention with enucleation is the treatment choice for this benign disease and timely surgical intervention is recommended for the avoidance of complications that may be associated with late presentation of giant lesions.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 Analytical OncologySame topicBreast Lesions and CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207