MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4323656463 · doi:10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100739

National brain tumour registry: a new era of research collaboration with China

2023· article· en· W4323656463 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Santosh Valvi, Matthew D. Dun, Jordan R. Hansford

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBrain Metastases and Treatment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesPharmaceuticals Bayer
Mots-clésScopusCancerMedicineIncidence (geometry)ChinaCause of deathFamily medicineMEDLINEDemographyGerontologyInternal medicinePolitical scienceDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Cancer continues to be a leading cause of death globally.1Bray F. Laversanne M. Weiderpass E. Soerjomataram I. The ever-increasing importance of cancer as a leading cause of premature death worldwide.Cancer. 2021; 127: 3029-3030Crossref PubMed Scopus (625) Google Scholar However, there remains a significant disparity in the reported incidence of cancer in developed countries, estimated to be 295.3 cases per 100,000 people, compared with only 115.7 in developing countries.2Clinton S.K. Giovannucci E.L. Hursting S.D. The World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research third expert report on diet, nutrition, physical activity, and cancer: impact and future directions.J Nutr. 2020; 150: 663-671Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (260) Google Scholar Some of the reasons for this variation include lack of robust data collection with limited reporting systems, and insufficient data availability in the registries of these developing nations.3Sun D. Cao M. Li H. He S. Chen W. Cancer burden and trends in China: a review and comparison with Japan and South Korea.Chin J Cancer Res. 2020; 32: 129-139Crossref PubMed Google Scholar Globally, there were 308,102 new cases of brain and central nervous system (CNS) cancers reported in 2020, making it the 21st most common cancer type.4Sung H. Ferlay J. Siegel R.L. et al.Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71: 209-249Crossref PubMed Scopus (37388) Google Scholar Consistent with its rapid economic growth, the spectrum of cancer diagnoses in China is also developing5Qiu H. Cao S. Xu R. Cancer incidence, mortality, and burden in China: a time-trend analysis and comparison with the United States and United Kingdom based on the global epidemiological data released in 2020.Cancer Commun. 2021; 41: 1037-1048Crossref PubMed Scopus (231) Google Scholar; however, with it remains to be seen how Chinese CNS tumour statistics compare with the global trends over the next decade. In this issue of The Lancet Regional Health–Western Pacific, Xiao et al. provide the largest and most comprehensive report of patients diagnosed with brain tumours in over 50 registered institutes in China over the period of 2 years (2019–2020).6Xiao D. Yan C. Li D. Xi T. Liu X. Zhu D. National brain tumour registry of China (NBTRC) statistical report of primary tumours diagnosed in China in years 2019-2020.Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100715Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar The National Brain Tumour Registry of China (NBTRC) was established in 2018 to address the lack of standardised data collection at a national level. The assembled data is robust and uniform owing to the methods employed. Tumour pathology and anatomical sites were coded based on the 4th World Health Organization (WHO) classification of CNS tumours (2016) and ICD-O-3 and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) modules at the time. Data from this first nationwide brain tumour registry can now begin to be compared to other regions in the world. Authors were able to tease out the paediatric subgroup (0–14 years) with distinct histological and anatomical site distribution. The authors note early differences in the spectrum of diseases seen in China including less cases of meningioma and glioblastoma but more frequent diffuse and anaplastic astrocytoma compared to “Western” registries.7Walker E.V. Davis F.G. affiliates Cf Malignant primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in Canada from 2009 to 2013.Neuro Oncol. 2019; 21: 360-369Crossref PubMed Scopus (25) Google Scholar,8Ostrom Q.T. Price M. Neff C. et al.CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2015-2019.Neuro Oncol. 2022; 24: v1-v95PubMed Google Scholar This article also underscores the need for more balanced neurosurgical skills development across this vast country. Over the last decade, data from Chinese based registries have begun to be shared globally. From 2010, registry based reports have increased from 15 to more than 250 in the available literature in 2022. While this is not a true population-based registry, the inclusion of more than 50 hospitals across China is a great start that the authors are keen to continue to expand. Global collaboration has seen the improvement in cancer outcomes for many malignancies, particularly in paediatrics, including but not limited to medulloblastoma, acute leukaemia, and others.9McLachlan T. Matthews W.C. Jackson E.R. et al.B-cell lymphoma 6 (BCL6): from master regulator of humoral immunity to oncogenic driver in pediatric cancers.Mol Cancer Res. 2022; 20: 1711-1723Crossref PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar At the heart of these collaborations is clinical trials with sharing of data and tissues with research colleagues from around the world to improve outcomes for children. As the most populous country on Earth to date, China has had little engagement in collaborative paediatric oncology projects. Through numbers alone, if the international paediatric community is better able to engage with Chinese patients and clinicians in global studies, rare conditions that take much time to accrue patients to meaningful studies could dramatically speed the time to recruitment and improve outcomes. Recently we have seen focused international efforts to increase the speed of recruitment of patients diagnosed with uniformly lethal and rare diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPG) or diffuse midline gliomas (DMG), and the collaborative testing of novel combination strategies through international consortia such as the Pacific Neuro-Oncology Consortium (PNOC) and The COllaborative Network for NEuro-oncology Clinical Trials (CONNECT). One such trial is PNOC022 (NCT05009992) slated to open in 32 centres around the world (25 open currently).10Duchatel R.J. Mannan A. Woldu A.S. et al.Preclinical and clinical evaluation of German-sourced ONC201 for the treatment of H3K27M-mutant diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma.Neurooncol Adv. 2021; 3: vdab169Crossref PubMed Google Scholar,11Przystal J.M. Cianciolo Cosentino C. Yadavilli S. et al.Imipridones affect tumor bioenergetics and promote cell lineage differentiation in diffuse midline gliomas.Neuro Oncol. 2022; 24: 1438-1451Crossref PubMed Scopus (16) Google Scholar Importantly, epidemiological data and tissue banking for correlative studies is critical in the design of this adaptive trial, and used for the determination of drug penetration, on target pharmacodynamic characteristics, immune cell profiling and molecular characterisation. While the slightly higher incidence of DMG seen in the NBTRC (5.13% vs. 4.8% in CBTRUS) can be explained on the basis of regional variation; tumour location showed marked differences. Brainstem tumours are reported to be much more common in Chinese children (20.24% NBTRC vs 12.6% CBTRUS).7Walker E.V. Davis F.G. affiliates Cf Malignant primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in Canada from 2009 to 2013.Neuro Oncol. 2019; 21: 360-369Crossref PubMed Scopus (25) Google Scholar These data will need further exploration moving forward, which will help to identify factors associated with this increased incidence. Nevertheless, the NBTRC is a potentially powerful platform for international collaboration particularly if economic and logistic challenges around fresh sample collection and transportation can be achieved. An additional complexity that will need to be addressed, is the necessity to establish open and collaborative data sharing arrangements. But if possible, international collaboration could assist the NBTRC to provide their patients with molecular and epigenetic tissue profiling and help to refine diagnosis and prognosis, identify biomarkers of outcome and further increase the power of this initiative, thereby helping the NBTRC to play an important role in the international efforts to develop treatment strategies that improve outcomes for paediatric CNS tumour patients. There is also a need to investigate how the geographical and ethnic factors affect brain tumour distribution and outcomes in diverse global regions. The limiting factor, however, is the lack of standard and uniform patient registries in underdeveloped countries leading to inaccurate and unreliable information. NBTRC is a significant step forward in overcoming this problem and data collected under this registry will likely provide insights into the epidemiological parameters of brain tumour patients in China. Due to its comprehensive nature, it will also help in analysing data and increased collaboration at a global level and hopefully open the doors for more clinical trials participation of Chinese patients in international studies. SV, MD, and JRH each contributed to all aspects of this editorial. JRH has received honoraria for consultation from Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Alexion Pharmaceuticals Australia and Boxer Capital. National Brain Tumour Registry of China (NBTRC) statistical report of primary brain tumours diagnosed in China in years 2019–2020The histological and anatomical site distribution of brain tumours in the NBTRC was statistically different in the subgroup of children (0–14 years). Patient choice of pursuing trans-provincial treatment was common and the in-hospital LOS was longer compared to that reported in similar European and American patient populations, which merits further attention. Full-Text PDF Open Access

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,045
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,065
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,238

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0450,075
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0110,023
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0040,010
Science ouverte0,0040,012
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0180,005

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,139
Tête enseignante GPT0,444
Écart entre enseignants0,305 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Regional Health - Western PacificMême sujetBrain Metastases and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207