Gastric adenocarcinoma and proximal polyposis of the stomach (GAPPS): a new autosomal dominant syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was the clinical and pathological characterisation of a new autosomal dominant gastric polyposis syndrome, gastric adenocarcinoma and proximal polyposis of the stomach (GAPPS). METHODS: Case series were examined, documenting GAPPS in three families from Australia, the USA and Canada. The affected families were identified through referral to centralised clinical genetics centres. RESULTS: The report identifies the clinical and pathological features of this syndrome, including the predominant dysplastic fundic gland polyp histology, the exclusive involvement of the gastric body and fundus, the apparent inverse association with current Helicobacter pylori infection and the autosomal dominant mode of inheritance. CONCLUSIONS: GAPPS is a unique gastric polyposis syndrome with a significant risk of gastric adenocarcinoma. It is characterised by the autosomal dominant transmission of fundic gland polyposis, including areas of dysplasia or intestinal-type gastric adenocarcinoma, restricted to the proximal stomach, and with no evidence of colorectal or duodenal polyposis or other heritable gastrointestinal cancer syndromes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".