Adult Pancreatoblastoma: Clinical Insights and Outcomes Compared to Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pancreatoblastoma is perceived to be aggressive in adults; however, data are limited due to the rarity of the disease. We benchmarked clinico-pathologic characteristics, outcomes, and survival of adult patients with pancreatoblastoma to a comparable PDAC cohort using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). This study included 301,204 patients: 35 with pancreatoblastoma and 301,169 PDAC patients. Pancreatoblastoma patients were younger than PDAC patients (56 vs. 69 years, p < 0.001). More pancreatoblastoma patients were managed at academic institutions (63.0% vs. 40.7%, p = 0.047). The most frequent primary site was the head and the neck of the pancreas. There were no differences in tumor size (4.2 cm vs. 3.7 cm, p = 0.828), lymph node positivity (14.3% vs. 26.4%, p = 0.103), or metastasis at time of diagnosis (31.4% vs. 46.1%, p = 0.081). The majority of pancreatoblastoma patients underwent resection compared to a minority of PDAC patients (69.7% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). Time from diagnosis to surgery was longer for pancreatoblastoma patients (33 vs. 14 days, p = 0.030). Pancreaticoduodenectomy was the most common type of resection in the pancreatoblastoma and PDAC groups (47.8% vs. 67.7%, p = 0.124). Among resected patients, pancreatoblastoma patients were less likely to receive radiation (4.8% vs. 37.0%, p = 0.002), but the use of chemotherapy was similar to PDAC patients (60.9% vs. 70.7%). After matching, median overall survival was longer for pancreatoblastoma than PDAC (59.8 months vs. 15.2 months, p = 0.014).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".