MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407250853 · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1803078

Succinate Dehydrogenase B Expression Loss in Chordoma: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4407250853 on OpenAlexaff
Kristen Marciniuk, Luke Hnenny, Viktor Zherebitskiy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChordomaSuccinate dehydrogenaseExpression (computer science)BiologyMedicineEnzymeBiochemistryPathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) is a mitochondrial enzyme with tumor suppressive effects. SDH inactivation is associated with metabolic and epigenetic mechanisms of tumorigenesis. In central and peripheral nervous system tumors, SDH inhibition is associated with familial paraganglioma/pheochromocytoma and has been reported in pituitary adenomas and hemangioblastomas. Other known SDH loss tumors would be gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and pulmonary chondroma. To our knowledge, there are no reports of SDH loss in chordoma. Case: We report a 69-year-old female who presented with a 3-week history of headaches and diplopia associated with a left oculomotor palsy. MRI demonstrated a large highly vascular and avidly enhancing mass centered within the left sphenoid bone with invasion into the prepontine cistern, sella, left cavernous sinus, sphenoid sinus, and nasopharynx. A preliminary transnasal biopsy was performed to guide further management. Findings were consistent with an SDH deficient neoplasm with neuroepithelial differentiation covering a broad differential. Recommended management included maximal safe resection followed by proton beam radiotherapy. Due to the significant vascularity of the lesion preoperative transarterial embolization was performed to reduce intraoperative blood loss. Endoscopic transsphenoidal maximal safe resection was then performed. Results: The initial biopsy exhibited clusters of epithelioid looking tumor cells with ample amount of eosinophilic cytoplasm and sharp borders creating in some places impression of Zellballen pattern that would be more consistent with paraganglioma diagnosis. Although there were hints of focal cytoplasmic clearing, no physaliphorous cells or prominent myxoid stroma characteristic for chordoma were seen. SDH-B immunonegativity was found in the tumor tissue with positive internal control within the adjacent sinonasal mucosa which also would go along with the diagnosis of paraganglioma. However, synaptophysin negativity triggered more workup including use of brachyury and external consultation. The brachyury immunostain came back diffusely nuclear positive and based on that, external consultation favored a conventional chordoma over paraganglioma, pituitary adenoma and other options. Although molecular testing did not reveal TBXT gene mutations or EGFR (HER1) gene alterations common for chordomas, it did not show any other driving mutations including those related to paragangliomas (approximately 50% of sporadic chordomas have no known driver mutation). The histopathology of the subsequent resection specimen was much more consistent with the conventional chordoma appearance including presence of classic physaliphorous cells and the absence of features diagnostic for dedifferentiated or poorly differentiated chordomas. Yet SDH-B loss was maintained. Conclusion: Loss of SDH-B immunohistochemical expression and its connection to SDH production as well as its role in chordoma tumorigenesis remains to be determined. The overall frequency of SDH inactivation in chordomas and associated prognostic or clinical significance requires further investigation. Importantly, misdiagnosis of chordoma due to atypical histological features and SDH-B loss on immunohistochemistry is a possibility in small biopsy specimens which has the potential to significantly influence management strategies and subsequent patient outcomes. Publication History Article published online: 07 February 2025 © 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull BaseSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207