EARLY COLECTOMY AND GENETIC PREDISPOSITION ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF DESMOID TUMORS IN FAMILIAL ADENOMATOUS POLYPOSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Desmoid tumors are rare, non-metastasising fibromatoses which can occur in association with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Desmoids have a prevalence of 10-20% in FAP. Intra-abdominal desmoid tumors are a major source of morbidity in FAP, and are one of the common causes of death in these patients. Desmoid tumors often develop in surgical scars leading to the theory that local trauma is a potential initiating factor. Prophylactic colectomy at an early age may increase the risk of developing desmoids. The aims of this study were to determine: (1) if colectomy earlier in life is a risk factor for the development of symptomatic desmoid tumors, and (2) if family history, APC genotype and gender are risk factors in the development of desmoids in FAP. The association between desmoid development and age at colectomy, family history of desmoids, gender, and APC mutation was reviewed in FAP patients entered in the Toronto Mount Sinai Hospital Polyposis Registry. Patients with FAP (n = 1 153) from 365 kindreds were identified over a 25 year period. Overall, desmoid prevalence was 10% (n = 121).The mean age at diagnosis of desmoid was 32.1 years (range 13.0 to 74.0 years, SD 11.9 years). Patients who developed desmoid tumors were significantly younger (26.9 years) at the time of colectomy, compared with patients who did not develop a desmoid (29.2 years) (P = 0.03). FAP patients with desmoid tumors had a strong family history of desmoids compared to FAP patients without desmoids (40% vs. 8%; P < 0.0001). There was no statistical significant difference between females (57.8%) and males (42.2) for the risk of developing a desmoid (P = 0.057). Patients who developed a desmoid were younger at the time of colectomy compared to those who did not develop a desmoid. Having a family history of desmoid tumors is a significant risk factor for the development of the same lesions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".