MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2500792444 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2016-521

Abstract 521: c-MYC as a differentiating marker between angiosarcoma and atypical vascular lesion

2016· article· en· W2500792444 on OpenAlexaff
Ipshita Kak, Bekim Sadiković, Guillaume Paré, Tom Corbett, Snežana Popović

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Tumors and Angiosarcomas
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstituteJuravinski Cancer CentreWestern UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngiosarcomaMedicineMalignancyPathologyBiopsySarcomaHemangiosarcomaLesionHistologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Angiosarcoma is a rare, aggressive malignancy that accounts for less than 1% of all sarcomas, characterized by a dismal 5 year survival of 20-30% at best. In striking contrast, atypical vascular lesion (AVL), which typically occurs secondary to radiation, follows for the most part, a benign course. However, debate rages over the true nature of AVL with reports describing both benign and malignant behavior. Further compounding the issue is the fact that overlapping histological features make the important differentiation between AVL and angiosarcoma difficult, especially on limited biopsy specimens. There have been a number of recent studies of c-MYC expression in vascular tumors in relation to this question, yielding varied results. Objectives: This pilot study aimed to investigate c-MYC expression in atypical vascular lesions and angiosarcomas (primary and secondary) to evaluate the clinical utility of c-MYC testing as an adjunct to the histological diagnosis. Methods: A retrospective search for biopsy, resection specimens and internal consult cases with diagnosis of angiosarcoma and/or atypical vascular lesion from January 2008- February 2014 was performed. A total of 32 cases (including controls) obtained after review were stained by dual colour c-MYC copy number probe set. The expression of c-MYC was read by two independent evaluators and final data was collated along with histology findings, follow-up and survival data. Results: c-MYC amplification was found to be a major differentiating factor (p value: 0.00002, 68% sensitivity, 96% specificity) between AVL and angiosarcoma(median c-MYC expression 1.0 vs. 12.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.8-1.9 vs. 9.2-22.3 respectively). The amplification levels of primary (median c-MYC expression:10.9, 95% confidence interval: 3.8-16.6) and secondary angiosarcoma (median c-MYC expression:13.2, 95% confidence interval: 9.0-25.5) were statistically not found to be significantly different (p = 0.07). Although no correlation was found between level of c-MYC amplification and outcome, the study was underpowered to accurately evaluate this relation. Conclusion: Amplification of c-MYC can be used as a reliable ancillary test to differentiate between diagnostically challenging cases of angiosarcoma and AVL. Citation Format: Ipshita Kak, Bekim Sadikovic, Guillaume Pare, Tom Corbett, Snezana Popovic. c-MYC as a differentiating marker between angiosarcoma and atypical vascular lesion. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 521.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicVascular Tumors and AngiosarcomasFrench-language works237,207