MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Genomic landscape of pineoblastoma.

2018· article· en· W2889889395 on OpenAlexaff
Bryan Kincheon Li, Alexandre Vasiljevic, Ben Ho, Anne Jouvet, Eugene Hwang, Jordan R. Hansford, Annie Laquerrière, Marie‐Bernadette Delisle, Sridharan Gururangan, Jason Fangusaro, Fabien Forest, Sumihito Nobusawa, Helen Toledano, Maryam Fouladi, Guillaume Gauchotte, David S. Ziegler, Éric Bouffet, Richard G. Grundy, Christelle Dufour, Annie Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)OncologyGermlineGeneticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2028 Background: Pineoblastoma (PB) is a rare but aggressive pediatric brain tumour arising from the pineal gland. Overall survival rates are estimated at 50-60%, with younger patients ( < 5 years old) faring much worse (15-40%) despite intensive treatment regimens. Although germline RB1 and DICER1 alterations have been reported in a small proportion of PB, the clinical significance of such alterations and the biology of sporadic cases remains unknown. Methods: We collected tumor tissue from 75 cases of PB diagnosed at their local centres from across five continents. We undertook global DNA methylation profiling and performed multiple orthogonal consensus clustering analyses to elucidate PB subgroups. Chromosomal copy number alterations were determined using Conumee then GISTIC 2.0. Mutational analysis was conducted by whole exome and RNA sequencing. Clinical data was analyzed with correlative statistical methods and outcomes were measured by Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. Results: We discovered that PBs comprise four molecular sub-types, designated groups 1 to 4, with characteristic copy number alterations and mutational patterns. These molecular sub-groups exhibit distinct clinical features and survival outcomes. While PB groups 1-3 arose in older children (median ages 5.2-12.6 years), group 4 PB was restricted to much younger children (median age 1.4 years). Group 4 PB exhibited the highest incidence of metastases (53%) and had the worst 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) at 7.7% and 16.7%, respectively. In contrast, group 2 patients had a 5-year EFS and OS of 100%, while groups 1 and 3 had intermediate outcomes (5-year EFS 36.1% and 53.3%, 5-year OS 68.1% and 53.3%, respectively). Conclusions: PBs divide into four groups, each with a distinct genetic and clinical profile. These findings will have important implications for precise patient stratification and form the foundation for preclinical studies of biology-informed therapies.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→