MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184726216 · doi:10.48083/vogf2319

Primary Adult Retroperitoneal Sarcoma: A Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Study

2021· article· en· W3184726216 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Necchi, Giuseppe Basile, Filippo Pederzoli, Marco Bandini, Petros Grivas, Gennady Bratslavsky, Philippe E. Spiess, Jonathan Keith Killian, Douglas I. Lin, Erik A. Williams, Shakti Ramkissoon, Eric A. Severson, Brian M. Alexander, Jeffrey M. Venstrom, Prasanth Reddy, Kimberly McGregor, Julia A. Elvin, Alexa B. Schrock, Dean C. Pavlick, Dexter X. Jin, Sally E. Trabucco, Natalie Danziger, Jeffrey S. Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueSociété Internationale d’Urologie Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynovial sarcomaLiposarcomaSarcomaCancer researchLeiomyosarcomaBiologyImmunohistochemistryGene expression profilingOncologyMedicineInternal medicineGenePathologyGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Adult primary retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPSs) are a group of heterogeneous tumors with different histological subtypes. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) analyses have recently provided significant insights into the biology of sarcomas by identifying genomic alterations (GAs) which could benefit from targeted therapies. Methods: RPS were evaluated by CGP using next-generation sequencing of up to 406 cancer-related genes. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined on 0.83 to 1.14 mut/Mb of sequenced DNA. Finally, PD-L1 expression was determined. Results: Overall, 296 cases of primary RPS were analyzed. Liposarcoma (LPS) subtype had more GA/tumor than leiomyosarcoma (LMS) subtypes, with follicular dendritic cell sarcomas harboring the highest and synovial sarcomas the lowest. TP53 and Rb1 alterations were the highest in LMS, and CDK4/6 and MDM2 in LPS. However, both the TMB and targetable GA rates were low across subtypes. PD-L1 immunostaining was low positive in 21% and high positive in 5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: CGP analysis revealed that potentially actionable genomic targets were rare in our cohort of RPS. Moreover, RPSs seem less likely to respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors based on putative biomarkers status. Nevertheless, genomic stratification according to histological subtypes led to description of GAs that can inform future clinical trials design.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociété Internationale d’Urologie JournalSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207