MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979921319 · doi:10.1586/14737159.4.2.157

Signature of a silent killer: expression profiling in epithelial ovarian cancer

2004· review· en· W1979921319 on OpenAlexaff
Cécile Le Page, Diane Provencher, Christine M. Maugard, Véronique Ouellet, Anne‐Marie Mes‐Masson

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Molecular Diagnostics · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian cancerEpigeneticsBiologyGene expression profilingComputational biologyProfiling (computer programming)DiseaseMicroarrayBioinformaticsCancerGeneGene expressionMedicineGeneticsInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the sequencing of the human genome and the simultaneous development of high-throughput strategies, cancer biologists have entered an exciting new area for gene expression analysis, with the ability to glimpse higher order patterns of genetic and epigenetic alterations in complex diseases. Ovarian cancer biologists are rising to the challenge of applying these new technologies to this silent killer, with the eventual goal of improving the quality of life and long-term survival of patients. This review provides a summary of the disease, a description of available technologies and their application to the ovarian cancer problem, as well as a discussion on the challenges and opportunities related to DNA microarray expression profiling-based research, including downstream clinical applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Molecular DiagnosticsSame topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207