Preparing for tomorrow: Molecular diagnostics and the changing nonsmall cell lung cancer landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last 10 to 15 years, the landscape of lung cancer has changed dramatically. Where cancers were previously described rather simplistically according to histological subtype, now molecular understanding of tumors has particularly resulted in segmentation of nonsmall cell lung cancer into many different subtypes. A multidisciplinary approach integrating a molecular testing algorithm that ideally includes reflex testing at diagnosis is recommended. This offers clinicians the opportunity to target treatment according to subtype. Identifying patients with rearrangements, such as those associated with the echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML-4) anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion gene (the major focus of this paper) has allowed clinicians to tailor therapy to target these mutations. The challenge that faces clinicians treating lung cancer is how best to implement the science that sits behind these targeted therapies in clinical practice through the identification of appropriate patients. Precision medicine can lead to the choice of the right medicine for the right patients and is proving to be a better approach than treating unselected patients with systemic chemotherapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".