MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399787335 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noae064.294

HGG-10. YAP1-MAML2 FUSION IN YOUNG CHILDREN WITH PEDIATRIC HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA: A CASE REPORT

2024· article· en· W4399787335 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Jewels, Samuel Bergeron‐Gravel, Simon Lagacé, Lili‐Naz Hazrati, Stephen Saikali, Christopher Dunham, Sylvia Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurooncologyOncologyLomustineDabrafenibChemotherapyDebulkingInternal medicinePediatricsPathologyCancerVincristineCyclophosphamide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND High-grade gliomas (HGG) in children are a heterogeneous group of central nervous system (CNS) tumors that are very aggressive and highly malignant. Few patients achieve long-term survival despite decades of clinical trials. International collaborations have sought to better describe and understand the genetic underpinnings of pediatric HGG in hopes to uncover more effective treatment options. We report two HGG cases of young children with a YAP1-MAML2 fusion. METHODS Clinical data was collected retrospectively, and pathology was reviewed to confirm the diagnosis. RNA sequencing was performed using the Illumina TruSight RNA Pan-cancer Next Generation Sequencing Panel. Methylation profiling was completed using the HumanMethylation450 BeadChip platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA). RESULTS Two children ages less than 5 years with HGG were identified to have the YAP1-MAML2 fusion. One child was diagnosed at age 4 years and had an additional somatic BRAF V600D mutation. The child was treated initially with surgical debulking and cisplatin-based chemotherapy but had rapid clinical and radiologic progression. Due to the BRAF V600D mutation, the child started Dabrafenib and Trametinib but continued to have rapid craniospinal dissemination and died within 8 weeks of presentation. The second child was diagnosed at age 2 years and had an additional oncogenic PTENpF341V mutation. DNA methylation profiling on this tumor did not show evidence of clustering with any known CNS tumor entity. This child was treated with surgical debulking, chemotherapy (Baby POG), focal radiation 5400cGy, and maintenance chemotherapy (lomustine and temozolomide as per COG ACNS 0423). This child continues to have stable residual disease 29 months from presentation. CONCLUSION We present two cases of HGG in young children with a unique YAP1-MAML2 fusion. Future studies are needed to further characterize the significance of how this new molecular alteration impacts treatment and long-term outcomes in pediatric HGG.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207