MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383724251 · doi:10.3390/brainsci13071040

A Case of Primary Intracranial Sarcoma, DICER1-Mutant, in a Child with a Germline DICER1 Mutation

2023· article· en· W4383724251 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Kosteniuk, George Michaiel, Christopher Dunham

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermlineMissense mutationMedicineSarcomaCarboplatinGermline mutationIfosfamidePathologyEtoposideCancer researchMutationChemotherapyInternal medicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DICER1 syndrome is a tumor predisposition syndrome caused by abnormal micro-RNA processing which leads to a variety of benign and malignant neoplasms in many organ systems, including the central nervous system. This paper reports the case of a primary intracranial sarcoma, DICER1-mutant, in a patient with a germline DICER1 variant thought most likely to be de novo. The patient is a ten-year-old boy who presented acutely with altered level of consciousness, emesis, and left-sided weakness. Imaging revealed a large right frontal hemorrhagic lesion, which was urgently debulked. Histology demonstrated a high-grade sarcomatous lesion. Molecular studies revealed compound heterozygous DICER1 variants (a frame shift insertion and a missense mutation), and a KRAS missense mutation. The final pathologic diagnosis was rendered to be “primary intracranial sarcoma, DICER1-mutant”. Germline genetic testing revealed that the patient possessed a germline DICER1 variant (parental testing was negative). A dramatic reduction in tumor size was precipitated via chemotherapy (ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide) and radiotherapy (focal proton beam therapy). There was no evidence of residual disease at the primary site at the end of the therapy.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207