MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Transmission of a Follicular Lymphoma by Allogeneic Bone Marrow Tranplantation — Evidence to Support the Existence of a Lymphoma Progenitor Cell.

2006· article· en· W2553261733 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Hart, A. Robert Turner, Loree Larratt, James A. Russell, Bevin Franko, Christine Frantz, Teresa Paonessa, Adnan Mansoor, Raymond Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollicular lymphomaLymphomaBiologyProgenitor cellGerminal centerBone marrowCancer researchFusion geneGene rearrangementChromosomal translocationImmunologyB cellStem cellGeneticsGeneAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Lymphomagenesis is believed to depend on clonal proliferation of neoplastic progenitor cells. For follicular lymphoma, the neoplastic progenitors are likely derived from the early B-cells, but their exact nature remains elusive. We report a case of transmission of a follicular lymphoma by allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Follicular lymphoma developed in the donor, and subsequently in the recipient, years after the BMT. Testing supports a common progenitor cell for both the malignancies. Methods: Sequencing of the amplifiable translocation (14;18) BCL2/IgH fusion gene product and microsatellite analysis using a commercially available human identity testing kit were used to establish the biological relatedness of the donor and recipient lymphomas. The monoclonal IgH gene rearrangements from these two lymphomas were further examined for their somatic hypermutational status. Results: Microsatellite analysis confirmed the recipient’s lymphoma was donor cell-derived. Analysis of the monoclonal IgH gene rearrangements revealed post-germinal center cell phenotype in both tumors. The VH regions utilized were different in the donor and recipient lymphoma, demonstrating two distinct clonal populations. Despite this difference, the sequences of the translocation (14;18) fusion gene products (BCL2/IgH) from the two lymphomas were identical confirming a common progenitor cell for both malignancies. Conclusion: Our findings strongly suggest the same neoplastic progenitor cells are responsible for the lymphomagenesis in both the donor and recipient. These findings support the concept of a lymphoma progenitor cell.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→