Nontesticular cancers in relatives of testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT) patients from multiple‐case TGCT families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) exhibit striking familial aggregation that remains incompletely explained. To improve the phenotypic definition of familial TGCT (FTGCT), we studied an international cohort of multiple-case TGCT families to determine whether first-degree relatives of FTGCT cases are at increased risk of other types of cancer. We identified 1041 first-degree relatives of TGCT cases in 66 multiple-case TGCT families from Norway and 64 from the United States (combined follow-up of 31,556 person-years). We collected data on all cancers (except nonmelanoma skin cancers) reported by the family informant in these relatives, and we attempted to verify all reported cancer diagnoses through medical or cancer registry records. We calculated observed-to-expected (O/E) standardized incidence ratios, together with 95% confidence intervals (CI), for invasive cancers other than TGCT. We found no increase in risk of cancer overall (Norway O/E = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.6-1.1 and United States O/E = 0.9; 95% CI: 0.7-1.3). Site-specific analyses pooled across the two countries revealed a leukemia excess (O/E = 6.5; 95% CI: 3.0-12.3), deficit of female breast cancer (O/E = 0.0; 95% CI: 0.0-0.6) and increased risk of soft tissue sarcoma (O/E = 7.2; 95% CI: 2.0-18.4); in all instances, these results were based on small case numbers and statistically significant only in Norway. While limited by sample size and potential issues relating to completeness of cancer reporting, this study in multiple-case TGCT families does not support the hypothesis that cancers other than testis cancer contribute to the FTGCT phenotype.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".