MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408502415 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32030172

Papillary Tumor of the Pineal Region Identified by DNA Methylation Leads to the Incidental Finding of Germline Mutation PTEN G132D Associated with PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome: A Case Report and Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4408502415 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nikole O’Neal, Eric A. Goold, Fatemeh Zarei Haji Abadi, Jeffrey Okojie, Jared J. Barrott

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPTENMedicineMacrocephalyCowden syndromePapillary tumorDNA methylationBrain tumorMethylationBioinformaticsGermline mutationEpigeneticsMammillary bodyPathologyInternal medicineBiologyGeneticsMutationGenePI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distinct subgroups of rare brain tumors can be molecularly classified using whole genome DNA methylation profiling and next-generation sequencing. Furthermore, these tools can identify germline mutations contributing to carcinogenesis. Access to molecular testing in the clinical setting is vital for pathology laboratories to make an accurate diagnosis. One molecularly unique brain tumor requiring such tools is the papillary tumor of the pineal region (PTPR). Herein, we present a case report of a 21-year-old male presenting with macrocephaly and obstructive hydrocephalus due to the PTPR. Next-generation sequencing identified a pathogenic PTEN p.G132D mutation in the tumor and matched germline findings further identified PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS). The case report tumor was initially misdiagnosed as ependymoma while methylation profiling classified it more specifically as a PTPR, Group B. To better understand the current status of PTPRs, we conducted a systematic review of recent cases reporting on the diagnostics, treatments, and outcomes for PTPR patients. To our knowledge, this is the first case report for PTPRs revealing an association with PHTS. Our review revealed inconsistencies in diagnostics, treatments, and outcomes for PTPR, and an underutilization of definitive molecular testing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.393
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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→