MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract A039 Circulating tumor DNA in pleuropulmonary blastoma (PPB)

2024· article· en· W4402266305 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kris Ann P. Schultz, Amanda L. Field, Dave Watson, Paige Mallinger, Alexander T. Nelson, Anna Dybvik, Nicole Frederickson, Melissa Abraham, Paige Reimche, Yoav H. Messinger, Louis P. Dehner, Chenyu Xu, Anne K. Harris, D. Ashley Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary BlastomaMedicinePathologyInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Pleuropulmonary blastoma (PPB) is a rare but often aggressive tumor seen primarily in infants and young children. Type I PPB is a purely cystic lesion, Type II PPB is cystic and solid and Type III PPB is a purely solid sarcoma. Types II and III PPB are aggressive sarcomas, treated with surgery and intensive, multiagent chemotherapy with or without radiation. Novel therapies to diagnose PPB and progression/recurrence are urgently needed. Nearly all PPBs have one of a specific set of somatic missense variants in the DICER1 gene in the RNase IIIb domain termed the “hotspot” region; most of these variants occur in a specific set of codons (E1705, D1709, G1809, D1810, E1813). One of eleven specific base substitutions are detected in 92% of PPBs. We hypothesized that a limited panel could be designed to detect these “hotspot” variants to facilitate noninvasive detection of PPB and monitor disease status. Methods: Children enrolled in the International PPB/DICER1 Registry (www.ppbregistry.org). Informed consent (and assent when applicable) was obtained. Pathology was centrally reviewed. Treatment remained at the discretion of the treating institutions; clinical course including imaging, surgery and disease status were abstracted. Tumor size was analyzed using largest solid tumor dimension. Tumors were sequenced to determine the tumor-specific RNase IIIb missense variant. Blood samples were collected in Streck tubes at specified timepoints including pre-chemotherapy and between cycles 4 and 5 of chemotherapy and analyzed using digital droplet PCR to determine the presence of the RNase IIIb variant in the extracted circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Results: Overall, 35 individuals with Type II or III PPB provided blood samples and had clinical and laboratory data available for analysis. In Type II or III PPB, pre-chemotherapy, 9/16 children had detectable ctDNA, 2/16 indeterminate and 5/16 undetectable ctDNA. Nine of 11 children with unresected tumors had detectable ctDNA versus 0/5 patients with resected tumors (p=0.005). The two patients with unresected tumors and indeterminate/undetectable ctDNA had smaller tumors (1 and 2.5 cm in largest dimension compared with 7.1 to 19.4 cm for the remaining cases). Among the 11 patients with unresected tumors, Spearman’s rank correlation between tumor size and number of variant droplets per PCR reaction was 0.59 (p=0.061). Seventeen individuals had samples drawn after cycle 4 and prior to cycle 5 of chemotherapy. Of these, 1/17 had detectable ctDNA, 5/17 indeterminate and 11/17 undetectable ctDNA. The single unresected patient at this timepoint had detectable ctDNA vs. 0/16 who had undergone resection by this timepoint. (p=0.059). Conclusion: In children with Types II and III PPB, detection of ctDNA is associated with resection status and tumor size. Ascertainment of ctDNA in children with Type II and III PPB represents a potential noninvasive detection method. Further research is needed to clarify the ability of current technologies to detect minimal residual disease in DICER1-related cancers. Citation Format: Kris Ann P. Schultz, Amanda L. Field, Dave Watson, Paige HR Mallinger, Alexander T. Nelson, Anna Dybvik, Nicole Frederickson, Melissa Abraham, Paige Reimche, Yoav H. Messinger, Louis P. Dehner, Chenyu Xu, Anne K. Harris, D. Ashley Hill. Circulating tumor DNA in pleuropulmonary blastoma (PPB) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Advances in Pediatric Cancer Research; 2024 Sep 5-8; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(17 Suppl):Abstract nr A039.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207