BCOR Internal Tandem Duplication Associated Uterine Sarcoma: Expanding the Clinicopathologic Spectrum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diagnosis of high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma has become more refined following molecular characterization of these tumors. Recently BCOR internal tandem duplications (ITD) have been identified in a small number of high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma. Here we present an additional case of this rare entity in a young woman in her late teens. She presented with menorrhagia and underwent resection of 2 uterine lesions. The tumor was a spindle cell neoplasm composed of long fascicles with low to moderate cellularity, mild to moderate cytologic atypia, and up to 2 mitotic figures per 10 high power fields. Necrosis was not identified. Immunohistochemical stains showed the tumor to be positive for cyclin D1 in >50% of tumor cells, focally positive for CD10, and negative for SMA, desmin, h-caldesmon, and ALK1. BCOR ITD was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction with subsequent Sanger sequencing. Clues to the diagnosis of BCOR ITD uterine sarcoma include young patient age, uniform nuclear features, and diffuse positivity for cyclin D1. These features should prompt further molecular interrogation for definitive diagnosis, which is important for prognostication.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".