Comprehensive profiling of myxopapillary ependymomas identifies a distinct molecular subtype with relapsing disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myxopapillary ependymoma (MPE) is a heterogeneous disease regarding histopathology and outcome. The underlying molecular biology is poorly understood, and markers that reliably predict the patients' clinical course are unknown. METHODS: We assembled a cohort of 185 tumors classified as MPE based on DNA methylation. Methylation patterns, copy number profiles, and MGMT promoter methylation were analyzed for all tumors, 106 tumors were evaluated histomorphologically, and RNA sequencing was performed for 37 cases. Based on methylation profiling, we defined two subtypes MPE-A and MPE-B, and explored associations with epidemiological, clinical, pathological, and molecular characteristics of these tumors. RESULTS: MPE-A occurred at a median age of 27 years and were enriched with tumors demonstrating papillary morphology and MGMT promoter hypermethylation. Half of these tumors could not be totally resected, and 85% relapsed within 10 years. Copy number alterations were more common in MPE-A. RNA sequencing revealed an enrichment for extracellular matrix and immune system-related signatures in MPE-A. MPE-B occurred at a median age of 45 years and included many tumors with a histological diagnosis of WHO grade II and tanycytic morphology. Patients within this subtype had a significantly better outcome with a relapse rate of 33% in 10 years (P = 3.4e-06). CONCLUSIONS: We unraveled the morphological and clinical heterogeneity of MPE by identifying two molecularly distinct subtypes. These subtypes significantly differed in progression-free survival and will likely need different protocols for surveillance and treatment.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".