MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994980283 · doi:10.1097/mph.0000000000001692

Neonatal Cancer Epidemiology and Outcome: A Retrospective Study

2019· article· en· W2994980283 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Geurten, Marie Geurten, Vincent Rigo, Marie‐Françoise Dresse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyRetrospective cohort studyOutcome (game theory)MedicineCancerInternal medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed at describing neonatal cancer incidence, distribution by type, location, outcome, and long-term toxicity, by comparison with tumors occurring later in infancy. METHODS: The authors led a single-center retrospective analysis of 118 cases of tumors diagnosed in the first year of life and compared tumors' types incidence, presentation, location, and outcome according to age group at diagnosis (below or over 28 d of life). RESULTS: The most frequent neonatal tumor types in our series were germ cell tumors, mainly teratoma, followed by neuroblastoma and renal tumors, whereas in children below 1 year of age, brain tumors, neuroblastoma, and leukemia were the most common types. Genetic predisposition syndromes were present in 14% of these infants and antenatal sonography enabled 68% of diagnosis for tumors presenting at birth. Other patients presented with mass syndrome, hydrops, or skin lesions. Six percent of neonates with cancer died from their malignancies, and up to 18% experienced a chronic health condition as a consequence of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor pattern differs in neonates and infants, with a higher percentage of benign tumors in children below 28 days of life. Yet, long-term therapy-related toxicity is significant in younger patients. Enhancing knowledge of neonatal tumors, their epidemiology, clinical presentation, genetic background, and prognosis should help promote better management and introduce follow-up programs to improve surviving rates and the quality of life of survivors.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.375 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/OncologySame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207