RARE-17. SURVIVAL BENEFIT FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH CONSTITUTIONAL MISMATCH REPAIR DEFICIENCY SYNDROME AND BRAIN TUMORS WHO UNDERGO SURVEILLANCE PROTOCOL. A REPORT FROM THE INTERNATIONAL REPLICATION REPAIR CONSORTIUM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome (CMMRD) is a severe cancer predisposition syndrome resulting in early onset central nervous system (CNS) and other cancers. International guidelines for surveillance exist but no study has systematically evaluated the efficacy of this protocol. METHODS We surveyed all confirmed CMMRD patients in the International Replication Repair Deficiency Consortium. A surveillance protocol consisting of frequent biochemical, endoscopic and imaging (CNS and total body MRI) studies were employed. Survival analyses and efficacy of each method were assessed. RESULTS Surveillance data were collected from 105 CMMRD individuals from 41 countries. Of the 193 malignant tumors, CNS malignancies were the most common (44%). The surveillance protocol uncovered 49 asymptomatic tumors including 16 glioblastomas and medulloblastomas. Five-year overall survival was 89% for tumors discovered by surveillance, and 61% for symptomatic tumors (p<0.004). Similarly, 5-year survival was 82+/-11% and 24+/-6% for surveillance and non-surveillance of brain tumors (p=0.005). Yearly total body and q6 month brain MRI detected asymptomatic cancers in all but 3 symptomatic CNS gliomas. These were tumors uncovered when time between scans was >6 months as per protocol. Finally, of the low grade tumors identified asymptomatically, 5 were low grade gliomas. All of the low grade gliomas, which were not resected transformed to high grade tumors at a median of 1.6 ± 0.9 years. CONCLUSION These data support a survival benefit in CMMRD patients undergoing a surveillance protocol. Adherence to protocol and resection of lower grade lesions may improve survival for patients with CNS tumors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".