MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321996971 · doi:10.1007/s11060-023-04253-2

The multiomic landscape of meningiomas: a review and update

2023· review· en· W4321996971 on OpenAlexaff
Justin Z. Wang, Farshad Nassiri, Alexander Landry, Vikas Patil, Jeff Liu, Kenneth Aldape, Andrew Gao, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsStructural Genomics ConsortiumPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersBrain Tumour Charity
KeywordsGrading (engineering)MeningiomaPaceBrain tumorSMARCB1Classification schemeEpigenomicsPrecision medicineBioinformaticsBiologyMedicinePathologyNeuroscienceComputer scienceEpigeneticsData scienceDNA methylationGeographyEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Meningiomas are the most common primary brain tumor in adults. Traditionally they have been understudied compared to other central nervous system (CNS) tumors. However over the last decade, there has been renewed interest in uncovering the molecular topography of these tumors, with landmark studies identifying key driver alterations contributing to meningioma development and progression. Recent work from several independent research groups have integrated different genomic and epigenomic platforms to develop a molecular-based classification scheme for meningiomas that could supersede histopathological grading in terms of diagnostic accuracy, biological relevance, and outcome prediction, keeping pace with contemporary grading schemes for other CNS tumors including gliomas and medulloblastomas. METHODS: Here we summarize the studies that have uncovered key alterations in meningiomas which builds towards the discovery of consensus molecular groups in meningiomas by integrating these findings. These groups supersede WHO grade and other clinical factors in being able to accurately predict tumor biology and clinical outcomes following surgery. RESULTS: Despite differences in the nomenclature of recently uncovered molecular groups across different studies, the biological similarities between these groups enables us to likely reconciliate these groups into four consensus molecular groups: two benign groups largely dichotomized by NF2-status, and two clinically aggressive groups defined by their hypermetabolic transcriptome, and by their preponderance of proliferative, cell-cycling pathways respectively. CONCLUSION: Future work, including by our group and others are underway to validate these molecular groups and harmonize the nomenclature for routine clinical use.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OncologySame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207