Current Understanding of “Mixed Corticomedullary Adrenal Tumor” and an Insight into Genomic Profiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Malignant mixed corticomedullary adrenal tumors (MCMTs) are extremely rare, with limited cases reported in the literature. The pathophysiology of malignant MCMTs is not well understood; the most prevailing theories are that it is a composite tumor of embryologically derived mesodermal (adrenal cortex) and neural crest (medulla) origin, perpetuating as two distinct cell lines forming a singular mass. Clinical features and laboratory diagnosis are associated with hypersecretions of the adrenal cortex and medulla. Surgical resection is curative in an isolated tumor. We reviewed and compared cases in the literature highlighting the pathogenesis and genetics of benign and malignant MCMT. METHODS: Comprehensive literature analysis was conducted on PubMed and all the cases of mixed corticomedullary adrenal tumor published in English were included. RESULTS: Most patients were female (73.1%) with a median age of 49 in women and 50 in men. Surgery was performed in all patients, and in four patients with malignant disease, chemotherapy was used as well. Clinically, most patients presented with hypertension (69%) followed by Cushing syndrome (42%) and diabetes (19%). Tumors often produced cortisol (74%), catecholamines (50%), and adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) (38%), with lower incidence of aldosterone- (7%) or dopamine (4%)-producing tumors. Immunohistochemical staining of 96% of cases showed Chromogranin-A (73%) and Synaptophysin (62%), followed by Inhibin-α (50%), Melan-A (31%), and S-100 (23%). Of the reported four cases with malignant disease, three showed a Ki-67 index of 40-50% with one showing less than 5%. CONCLUSION: Mixed corticomedullary adrenal tumors rarely present as a malignant disease requiring chemotherapy. Most MCMTs confer a good prognosis and respond well to surgical resection, though their pathogenesis is largely up to speculation because of limited data. Current theories regarding MCMT pathogenesis should be investigated further with genetic testing. Future research on MCMT may provide ways to guide physician diagnosis and subsequent treatment for refractory cases.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".