Polyploidy in atypical grade II choroid plexus papilloma of the posterior fossa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cytogenetic studies of choroid plexus tumors, particularly for atypical choroid plexus papillomas, have been rarely described. In the present report, the cytogenetic investigation of an atypical choroid plexus papilloma occurring at the posterior fossa of a 16-year-old male is described. Comparative genome hybridization analysis demonstrated gains of genetic material from almost all chromosomes. Chromosome losses involved 19p, regional losses at chromosome X and loss of chromosome Y. The presence of polyploid cells was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis with probes directed to centromeric regions. Furthermore, the microscopic analysis of cultures showed nuclear buds, nucleoplasmic bridges, and micronuclei in 23% of tumor cells suggesting the presence of complex chromosomal abnormalities. Previous cytogenetic studies on choroid plexus papillomas showed either normal, hypodiploid or hyperdiploid karyotypes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of polyploidy in choroid plexus papilloma of intermediate malignancy grade. Although the mechanisms beneath such genome duplication remain to be elucidated, the observed abnormal nuclear shapes indicate constant restructuring of the tumor's genome and deserves further investigation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".