MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969002050 · doi:10.1007/s00401-019-02056-2

MYCN amplification drives an aggressive form of spinal ependymoma

2019· article· en· W2969002050 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Ghasemi, Martin Sill, Konstantin Okonechnikov, Andrey Korshunov, Stephen Yip, Peter W. Schütz, David Scheie, A. Kruse, Patrick N. Harter, Marina Kastelan, Marlies Wagner, Christian Hartmann, Julia Benzel, Kendra K. Maaß, Mustafa Khasraw, Ronald Sträter, Christian Thomas, Werner Paulus, Christian P. Kratz, Hendrik Witt, Daisuke Kawauchi, Christel Herold‐Mende, Felix Sahm, Sebastian Brandner, Marcel Kool, David Jones, Andreas von Deimling, Stefan M. Pfister, David Reuß, Kristian W. Pajtler

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neuropathologica · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversitätsklinikum HeidelbergHelmholtz AssociationUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustDeutsche KrebshilfeEberhard Karls Universität TübingenStudienstiftung des Deutschen VolkesDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCERNDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
KeywordsEpendymomaSpinal cordPathologyFluorescence in situ hybridizationMedicineBiologyChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spinal ependymal tumors form a histologically and molecularly heterogeneous group of tumors with generally good prognosis. However, their treatment can be challenging if infiltration of the spinal cord or dissemination throughout the central nervous system (CNS) occurs and, in these cases, clinical outcome remains poor. Here, we describe a new and relatively rare subgroup of spinal ependymal tumors identified using DNA methylation profiling that is distinct from other molecular subgroups of ependymoma. Copy number variation plots derived from DNA methylation arrays showed MYCN amplification as a characteristic genetic alteration in all cases of our cohort (n = 13), which was subsequently validated using fluorescence in situ hybridization. The histological diagnosis was anaplastic ependymoma (WHO Grade III) in ten cases and classic ependymoma (WHO Grade II) in three cases. Histological re-evaluation in five primary tumors and seven relapses showed characteristic histological features of ependymoma, namely pseudorosettes, GFAP- and EMA positivity. Electron microscopy revealed cilia, complex intercellular junctions and intermediate filaments in a representative sample. Taking these findings into account, we suggest to designate this molecular subgroup spinal ependymoma with MYCN amplification, SP-EPN-MYCN. SP-EPN-MYCN tumors showed distinct growth patterns with intradural, extramedullary localization mostly within the thoracic and cervical spine, diffuse leptomeningeal spread throughout the whole CNS and infiltrative invasion of the spinal cord. Dissemination was observed in 100% of cases. Despite high-intensity treatment, SP-EPN-MYCN showed significantly worse median progression free survival (PFS) (17 months) and median overall survival (OS) (87 months) than all other previously described molecular spinal ependymoma subgroups. OS and PFS were similar to supratentorial ependymoma with RELA-fusion (ST-EPN-RELA) and posterior fossa ependymoma A (PF-EPN-A), further highlighting the aggressiveness of this distinct new subgroup. We, therefore, propose to establish SP-EPN-MYCN as a new molecular subgroup in ependymoma and advocate for testing newly diagnosed spinal ependymal tumors for MYCN amplification.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations178
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa NeuropathologicaSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207