MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281567617 · doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2022.100644

Genetic changes associated with relapse in favorable histology Wilms tumor: A Children’s Oncology Group AREN03B2 study

2022· article· en· W4281567617 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha Gadd, Vicki Huff, Andrew D. Skol, Lindsay A. Renfro, Conrad V. Fernandez, Elizabeth A. Mullen, Corbin D. Jones, Katherine A. Hoadley, Kai Lee Yap, Nilsa C. Ramirez, Sheena M. Aris, Quy H. Phung, Elizabeth J. Perlman

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersCancer MoonshotNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesBroad InstituteGovernment of South AustraliaHarvard UniversitySt. Baldrick's FoundationNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsWilms' tumorLoss of heterozygosityOncologyBiologyInternal medicineGeneCancer researchGeneticsMedicineAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decade, sequencing of primary tumors has clarified the genetic underpinnings of Wilms tumor but has not affected therapy, outcome, or toxicity. We now sharpen our focus on relapse samples from the umbrella AREN03B2 study. We show that over 40% of relapse samples contain mutations in SIX1 or genes of the MYCN network, drivers of progenitor proliferation. Not previously seen in large studies of primary Wilms tumors, DIS3 and TERT are now identified as recurrently mutated. The analysis of primary-relapse tumor pairs suggests that 11p15 loss of heterozygosity (and other copy number changes) and mutations in WT1 and MLLT1 typically occur early, but mutations in SIX1, MYCN, and WTX are late developments in some individuals. Most strikingly, 75% of relapse samples had gain of 1q, providing strong conceptual support for studying circulating tumor DNA in clinical trials to better detect 1q gain earlier and monitor response.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell Reports MedicineSame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207