MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415560515 · doi:10.3390/genes16111260

Examining the Concordance of Detection of Hereditary Cancer Gene Variants Between Blood, Tumour, and Normal Tissue in Patients with High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma

2025· article· en· W4415560515 on OpenAlexaff
L. M. Mui, Jennifer Kerkhof, C. Meg McLachlin, Karen Panabaker, Jacob McGee, Bekim Sadiković, Emily A. Goebel

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcordanceGermlineSerous fluidGeneHereditary CancerGermline mutationOvarian cancerGenetic testingCancer syndrome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Access to genetic counselling and BRCA1/2 germline testing is standard of care for patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC). While tumour testing reliably detects pathogenic variants in hereditary cancer genes, it cannot distinguish somatic from germline variants. Concurrent testing of non-cancerous (normal) tissue obtained during surgery may improve triage for germline testing and clinical genetics referral. This study evaluated the concordance of inherited variant detection among tumour, normal tissue, and blood to determine whether archived normal tissue can reliably identify germline pathogenic variants. METHODS: Patients with HGSOC who had a pathogenic variant identified by targeted Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) tumour testing and underwent germline hereditary cancer gene panel (HCP) testing between April 2019 and November 2020 were included. HCP testing was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded normal tissue from the original resection. Variant results were compared across tumour, normal tissue, and germline (blood) samples to determine concordance, false-negative, and false-positive rates. RESULTS: Forty-one patients had confirmed tumour variants in BRCA1/2 or other HCP genes. Of these, 24 harboured a corresponding germline pathogenic variant. Archived normal tissue was available for 23 of these 24 cases, and all germline variants were detected in normal tissue, showing 100% concordance. Among the 17 patients without germline variants, all corresponding normal tissue samples were negative, also demonstrating 100% concordance. No false positives or negatives were identified. CONCLUSIONS: NGS testing of normal tissue at surgical resection reliably identifies germline pathogenic variants in patients with HGSOC. Incorporating this approach may help triage patients for clinical genetics assessment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenesSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207