MPTH-34. THE PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF POLYSOMY IN OLIGODENDROGLIAL TUMORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testing for 1p/19q status is the most common molecular test for brain tumors. 1p/19q loss is the hallmark feature of oligodendroglial tumors, associated with response to chemotherapy and favorable prognosis. In addition to simple 1p/19q loss, more complex cytogenetic patterns exist. For example, polysomy in >30% of cells in the setting of 1p/19q co-deletion, so-called superloss, has been associated with shorter progression free survival (PFS) in anaplastic oligodendrogliomas. We evaluated the prognostic significance of polysomy across WHO grades and histologies; both in 1p/19q co-deleted as well as not co-deleted tumors. We retrospectively analyzed 412 oligodendrogliomas and oligoastrocytomas diagnosed between 1996 to 2010 from 8 institutions with fluorescence in situ hybridization for 1p/19q. Polysomy was defined as >2 1q and/or 19p signals in cells. Tumors were divided into groups based on their 1p/19q deletion status and polysomy and compared for PFS and overall survival (OS). In our cohort, 333 tumors (81%) had 1p/19q loss; of these, 195 (59%) had concurrent polysomy and 138 (41%) lacked polysomy. Seventy-nine tumors (19%) had 1p/19q maintenance; of these of these, 30 (38%) had concurrent polysomy and 49 (62%) lacked polysomy. In agreement with prior studies, the entire group with 1p/19q loss had significantly better PFS and OS than tumors with 1p/19q maintenance (p<0.0001 each). There was a statistically significant difference in PFS and OS (p<0.0001 each) between the groups of patients with tumors with 1p/19q loss, 1p/19q loss and polysomy and tumors with 1p/19q maintenance. There was no difference in survival of 1p/19q co-deleted tumors with >30% and <30% of polysomic cells. There was no statistically significant difference in PFS or OS between patients with 1p/19q maintenance with or without polysomy. The presence of any polysomy in oligodenroglial tumors with co-deletion of 1p/19q predicts early recurrence and short survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".