Molecular characteristics of a pancreatic adenocarcinoma associated with Shwachman‐Diamond syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shwachman-Diamond syndrome (SDS) is characterized by hypoplasia of the bone marrow and exocrine pancreas and a high risk of leukemia. It is unknown whether solid tumors are part of the disease phenotype. PROCEDURE: We performed copy number alterations using Affymetrix human SNP 6.0 array. Furthermore, we did direct sequencing of pancreatic cancer-related genes and immunohistochemical expression of selective proteins. RESULTS: Among 41 patients with SDS who enrolled on the registry, we identified one male patient with a solid tumor: moderately differentiated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The tumor harbored 41 copy number alterations (CNAs) and had no regions of loss of heterozygosity (LOH). None of these CNAs were exclusive to the tumor. One copy of the tumor suppressor genes CTNNA3 and LGALS9C was lost in both the peripheral blood and tumor. Direct sequencing of TP53, KRAS, and NRAS revealed no mutations. Immunohistochemical staining for cyclin D1, E-cadherin, p53 MLH1 and MSH2 and β-catenin, was similar to that seen in non-hereditary pancreatic cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our case raises the possibility that solid tumors are associated with SDS, thereby broadening the clinical phenotype of the disease. The relatively young age at cancer diagnosis and the specific involvement of the pancreas make the possibility of an association with SDS likely. Similar to leukemia in SDS, the pancreatic cancer developed in hypoplastic tissues. This observation and the relative genomic stability of the tumor strengthen the hypothesis of improved adaptation of malignant clones among a population of disadvantaged cells as a mechanism for tumor expansion in SDS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".