MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394956806 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000002229

Genomic Catastrophe (Chromothripsis and Polyploidy) Correlates With Tumor Distribution in Extrauterine High-grade Serous Carcinoma

2024· article· en· W4394956806 on OpenAlexaff
Ju‐Yoon Yoon, Aarti Sharma, Azra H. Ligon, Rebecca G. Ramesh, T. Rinda Soong, Wa Xian, David B. Chapel, Christopher P. Crum

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteOvarian Cancer Research AllianceBrigham and Women's HospitalU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSerous fluidFallopian tubeSerous carcinomaPathologyOvarian cancerOvaryBiologyCancerMedicineInternal medicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most extrauterine high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSCs) are thought to develop first in the distal fallopian tube. Most models of HGSC assume origin from relatively stable, noninvasive serous tubal intraepithelial carcinomas. However, widespread tumor involvement in the absence of a serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma could occur after catastrophic genomic events (CGEs; such as chromothripsis or polyploidy). Twenty-six HGSCs assigned to fallopian tube (n = 9, group 1) and/or ovary (n = 9, group 2), and primary peritoneal (n = 8, group 3) were assessed by microarray (Oncoscan). CGEs were identified in 15/26 (57.7%); chromothripsis-like pattern in 13/26 (50.0%) and polyploidy in 6/26 (23.1%). CGE was seen in 4/9 (44.4%), 9/9 (100%), and 2/8 (25%) cases in groups 1. 2, and 3, respectively. Overall, CGEs were seen in 9/9 (100%) cases with grossly evident ovarian parenchymal involvement versus 6/17 (35.3%) without ( P = 0.0024). Ovarian size (measured on the long axis) correlated with CGE positivity ( P = 0.016). CGEs are significantly more common in HGSCs with ovarian parenchymal involvement compared with those limited to the fallopian tube and/or extraovarian tissues. These associations suggest geographically different tumor growth patterns and support the subdivision of HGSCs according to not only the stage but also tumor distribution. They have implications for clinical and pathologic presentation, trajectory of tumor evolution, and in the case of primary peritoneal HGSCs, potentially unique precursors to tumor transitions that could inform or influence cancer prevention efforts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207