MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007060065 · doi:10.1002/pbc.28153

Optimization of percutaneous biopsy for diagnosis and pretreatment risk assessment of neuroblastoma

2020· article· en· W3007060065 on OpenAlexaff
R. Elliott Overman, Tanvi T. Kartal, Aaron J. Cunningham, Elizabeth Fialkowski, Bindi Naik‐Mathuria, Sanjeev A. Vasudevan, Marcus M. Malek, Ranjeet Kalsi, Hau D. Le, Linda Cherney Stafford, Timothy B. Lautz, Benjamin T. Many, Rachel Jones, Andreana Bütter, Jacob Davidson, Andrew K. Williams, Roshni Dasgupta, Jana L. Lewis, Misty Troutt, Jennifer H. Aldrink, Sara A. Mansfield, Dave R. Lal, Jerry Xiao, Rebecka L. Meyers, Scott S. Short, Erika A. Newman

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Blood & Cancer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Western OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuroblastomaBiopsyPercutaneousPediatric oncologyInternal medicineOncologySurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Image-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy (PCNB) is increasingly utilized to diagnose solid tumors. The objective of this study is to determine whether PCNB is adequate for modern biologic characterization of neuroblastoma. PROCEDURE: A multi-institutional retrospective study was performed by the Pediatric Surgical Oncology Research Collaborative on children with neuroblastoma at 12 institutions over a 3-year period. Data collected included demographics, clinical details, biopsy technique, complications, and adequacy of biopsies for cytogenetic markers utilized by the Children's Oncology Group for risk stratification. RESULTS: A total of 243 children were identified with a diagnosis of neuroblastoma: 79 (32.5%) tumor excision at diagnosis, 94 (38.7%) open incisional biopsy (IB), and 70 (28.8%) PCNB. Compared to IB, there was no significant difference in ability to accurately obtain a primary diagnosis by PCNB (95.7% vs 98.9%, P = .314) or determine MYCN copy number (92.4% vs 97.8%, P = .111). The yield for loss of heterozygosity and tumor ploidy was lower with PCNB versus IB (56.1% vs 90.9%, P < .05; and 58.0% vs. 88.5%, P < .05). Complications did not differ between groups (2.9 % vs 3.3%, P = 1.000), though the PCNB group had fewer blood transfusions and lower opioid usage. Efficacy of PCNB was improved for loss of heterozygosity when a pediatric pathologist evaluated the fresh specimen for adequacy. CONCLUSIONS: PCNB is a less invasive alternative to open biopsy for primary diagnosis and MYCN oncogene status in patients with neuroblastoma. Our data suggest that PCNB could be optimized for complete genetic analysis by standardized protocols and real-time pathology assessment of specimen quality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Blood & CancerSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207