Needle core biopsy of renal neoplasms: the Winnipeg experience and comparison with the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renal cell carcinoma is the seventh most common malignant neoplasm in the western countries. Renal tumour core biopsy is a procedure to provide histopathological information and guide treatment. The main objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic rate and accuracy of renal core biopsy in the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma type, subtype, and nuclear grade. We also hypothesized that clear cell subtype and high grade cases would be more likely to undergo nephrectomy than any other subtypes and low grade cases. This study included 163 cases from 2007 to 2016. By comparing the renal biopsy pathology reports with the subsequent nephrectomy reports, the diagnostic rate was 84% and non-diagnostic rate was 9.2%. Histologic type and subtype were 100% concordant. The data from this study shows excellent accuracy of renal core biopsy in diagnosing histology subtypes. Therefore, the application of renal core biopsy should be expanded. However, histologic subtype and grade did not affect clinical decision making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".