MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493687124 · doi:10.1002/gcc.22398

Heterogeneity of <i>MYCN</i> amplification in neuroblastoma at diagnosis, treatment, relapse, and metastasis

2016· article· en· W2493687124 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Marrano, Meredith S. Irwin, Paul S. Thorner

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes Chromosomes and Cancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroblastomaHistologyClinical significanceGene duplicationCopy-number variationCancer researchFluorescence in situ hybridizationMetastasisN-MycMedicinePathologyBiologyCancerGeneInternal medicineGenomeGeneticsCell cultureGanglioneuroma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amplification of the MYCN gene in neuroblastoma is associated with a poor prognosis and is considered to remain unchanged in post-treatment specimens and metastases. While heterogeneity of MYCN copy number in tumor cells has been reported, serial samples have only been studied in a limited way, and the biologic relevance of this finding is not well understood. We used in situ hybridization on paraffin sections of 102 specimens from 30 patients with MYCN-amplified neuroblastoma to determine MYCN copy number in the primary tumor, pre- and post-treatment, and in metastatic samples. Nineteen cases (63%) showed diffuse MYCN amplification in all samples tested. Nine cases (30%) showed a reduction in MYCN copy number: five cases with diffuse amplification subsequently showed focal amplification, one case with diffuse MYCN amplification showed MYCN gain after treatment, and three focally amplified cases were non-amplified in later specimens. In two cases (7%), focal amplification became diffuse in subsequent samples. Histology was not predictive of the temporal or spatial pattern of MYCN amplification for a particular tumor. If extent of amplification (focal vs. diffuse) is not considered, 26/30 (87%) of cases were consistently MYCN-amplified. However, our data suggest that MYCN status can be heterogeneous between tumor sites, during tumor progression or following treatment, challenging the notion that MYCN copy number does not change for a particular neuroblastoma. Assessing the biologic significance of MYCN heterogeneity will require larger studies of clinically annotated tumor samples, and will depend on interpreting heterogeneity in MYCN status in combination with other genetic changes. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes Chromosomes and CancerSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207