MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388760551 · doi:10.3390/diagnostics13223464

Diagnostic Insights into Pediatric Pleomorphic Xanthoastrocytoma through DNA Methylation Class and Pathological Diagnosis Analysis

2023· article· en· W4388760551 on OpenAlexaff
Murad Alturkustani

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleomorphic xanthoastrocytomaPilocytic astrocytomaCDKN2AAstrocytomaPathologicalPathologyDNA methylationMethylationGliomaDifferential diagnosisBiologyMedicineDNAGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study adopts an innovative approach to utilize the DNA methylation class (MC) by prioritizing the understanding of discrepancies over traditional direct comparisons with the pathological diagnosis (PD). The aim is to clarify the morphological criteria for pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA). Using the Children’s Brain Tumor Network online database, PXA-diagnosed cases were sourced. MCs and CDKN2A/B statuses were ascertained using the Heidelberg methylation brain tumor classifier v12.5 (v12.8 for selected cases). Three distinct groups emerged: Group 1 confirmed PXA through both PD and MC (7 cases); Group 2 identified PXA via PD alone (7 cases); and Group 3 diagnosed PXA using MC (5 cases). Key insights from the study include the frequent local infiltration of PXA into gray matter structures, mirroring infiltrative astrocytoma. The MC for PXA stands out for its sensitivity. Cases with a PXA morphological diagnosis diverging from the DNA class warrant attention to newer differential diagnoses such as high-grade astrocytoma with piloid features, pilocytic astrocytoma NF1-associated, and NET-PATZ1. Tumors with a MC indicative of PXA but lacking its typical features may, if high-grade, behave as grade 4 gliomas. In contrast, their low-grade counterparts could belong to the PXA morphological continuum. Further research is pivotal for cementing these findings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnosticsSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207