Abstract 3935: International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) is coordinating an extensive research effort to obtain a comprehensive description of genomic, transcriptomic and epigenomic changes in the major forms of cancer. This information will lead to better ways of diagnosing, treating and preventing cancer. The announcement of the ICGC Goals, Structure, Policies and Guidelines to the international scientific community in 2008 enabled funding agencies and research groups to plan their participation within the ICGC. Over 200 authors engaged in ICGC projects published a Nature paper in April 2010. The paper outlines the ethical framework, study design, use of common standards of data collection and analysis and describes how the projects will proceed. As of November 2010, the ICGC has received commitments from funding organizations in Asia, Australia, Europe and North America for the projects listed in the table (below). Over time, additional nations and organizations are anticipated to join the ICGC. Each Cancer Genome Project is expected to involve specimens from approximately 500 patients. Over the next ten years, the ICGC expects to produce comprehensive catalogues of the full range of genetic mutations involved in 50 types of cancer, with key factors being the ability to detect all mutated cancer genes, data at the level of individual DNA bases, application of common standards for pathology and technology and comparison data from matched, non-tumour tissue. The ICGC's informed consent and ethical oversight policies state that cancer patients enrolled in an ICGC-related study should be informed that their participation is voluntary, that their clinical care will not be affected by their participation and that data obtained from analyses using their samples will be made available to the international research community. The genomic analyses of tumors conducted by ICGC members in the U.K. (breast, lung and skin cancer), Japan (liver cancer), and Australia and Canada (pancreatic cancer) are now available on the ICGC website at www.icgc.org. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 3935. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-3935
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 | 0.020 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.102 | 0.032 |
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".