CDH1 Gene Mutation Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer Outcomes: Analysis of a Large Cohort, Systematic Review of Endoscopic Surveillance, and Secondary Cancer Risk Postulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
mutation carriers have additional risk of lobular breast cancer. Risk management includes prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG). The utility of endoscopic surveillance is unclear, as early disease lacks macroscopic lesions. The current systematic biopsy protocols have unknown efficacy, and other secondary cancer risks are postulated. We conducted a retrospective study of consecutive asymptomatic HDGC patients undergoing PTG, detailing endoscopic, pathologic, and outcome results. A systematic review compared endoscopic biopsy foci detection via random sampling versus Cambridge Protocol against PTG findings. A population-level secondary-cancer-risk postulation among sporadic gastric SRCC patients was completed using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Of 97 patients, 67 underwent PTG, with 25% having foci detection on random endoscopic biopsy despite 75% having foci on final pathology. There was no improvement in the endoscopic detection rate by Cambridge Protocol. The postulated hazard ratio among sporadic gastric SRCC patients for a secondary colorectal SRCC was three-fold higher, relative to conventional adenocarcinoma patients. Overall, HDGC patients should not rely on endoscopic surveillance to delay PTG, and may have secondary SRCC risks. A definitive determination of actual risk requires collaborative patient outcome data banking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".