The pathophysiology of bilateral and multifocal Wilms tumors: What we can learn from the study of predisposition syndromes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 5% of patients with Wilms tumor present with synchronous bilateral disease. The development of synchronous bilateral Wilms tumor (BWT) is highly suggestive of a genetic or epigenetic predisposition. Patients with known germline predisposition to Wilms tumor (WT1 variants, Beckwith Wiedemann spectrum, TRIM28 variants) have a higher incidence of BWT. This Children's Oncology Group (COG)-International Society for Pediatric Oncology (SIOP-) HARMONICA initiative review for pediatric renal tumors details germline genetic and epigenetic predisposition to BWT development, with an emphasis on alterations in 11p15.5 (ICR1 gain of methylation, paternal uniparental disomy, and postzygotic somatic mosaicism), WT1, TRIM28, and REST. Molecular mechanisms that result in BWT are often also present in multifocal Wilms tumor (multiple separate tumors in one or both kidneys). We identify priority areas for international collaborative research to better understand how predisposing genetic or epigenetic factors associate with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, oncologic outcomes, and long-term renal function outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".