MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407763978 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfaf032

The impact of the new WHO classification of renal cell carcinoma on the diagnosis of hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma

2025· review· en· W4407763978 on OpenAlexaff
J Degenhardt, Yuri Tolkach, Mahul B. Amin, Giovanni Mosiello, Dilek Ertoy Baydar, Émilie Cornec-Le Gall, Jason DiCola, Dean Elhag, Christian Frezza, Jan Halbritter, Ignacio Blanco, Michael Jewett, Jean-Baptiste Lattouf, Graham Lovitt, Per‐Olof Lundgren, Eamonn R. Maher, Peter Mulders, Arndt Hartmann, Roman-Ulrich Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersEuropean Rare Kidney Disease Reference Network
KeywordsMedicineLeiomyomatosisRenal cell carcinomaBAP1PathologyKidney cancerGermline mutationCarcinomaGermlineNephrectomyOncologyInternal medicineCancerKidneyLeiomyomaMutationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma (HLRCC) syndrome is caused by heterozygous germline variants in the fumarate hydratase (FH) gene. Inheritance follows an autosomal dominant pattern. Loss of FH confers a predisposition for various benign and malignant neoplasms, including cutaneous leiomyomas, uterine fibroids and FH-deficient renal cell carcinoma. While benign, cutaneous and uterine manifestations have a relevant impact on quality of life and risk for complications, the vast majority of FH-deficient RCCs exhibit an aggressive behaviour with invasive growth and the potential for early metastatic spread. Additionally, pathogenic germline FH variants have been associated with other neoplasms, such as adrenal gland and Leydig cell tumours. The aggressive behaviour of FH-deficient RCC challenges nephron-sparing resection strategies, as a wide margin is recommended. Even after early nephrectomy for surgical removal of FH-deficient renal cell carcinomas, there is a relevant risk for distant metastasis as well as the remaining predisposition for de novo primary renal tumours in the other kidney. Active screening is central to HLRCC care since no preventative HLRCC-specific treatment exists. Vascular endothelial growth factor/epidermal growth factor receptor-directed treatment regimes, such as erlotinib/bevacizumab, demonstrate efficacy against HLRCC-associated RCC. This emphasizes the importance of establishing the correct diagnosis in HLRCC early on to guide therapeutic decisions. Morphologic criteria as well as specific immunohistochemical staining and molecular genetics allow the identification of FH-deficient RCC. Changes made in the recent 2022 World Health Organization classification impact the diagnosis of HLRCC in multiple ways. This commentary aims to discuss this impact and raise awareness among pathologists as well as clinicians involved in the care of patients with HLRCC.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207