Machine learning methods for predicting tumor response in lung cancer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Among cancer victims, lung cancer accounts for most fatalities in men and women. Patients at advanced stages of lung cancer suffer from poor survival rate. Majority of these patients are not candidates for surgery and receive radiation therapy (radiotherapy) as their main course of treatment. Despite effectiveness of radiotherapy against many cancers, more than half of these patients are unfortunately expected to fail. Recent advances in biotechnology have allowed for an unprecedented ability to investigate the role of gene regulation in lung cancer development and progression. However, limited studies have provided insight into lung tumor response to radiotherapy. The inherent complexity and heterogeneity of biological response to radiation therapy may explain the inability of existing prediction models to achieve the necessary sensitivity and specificity for clinical practice's or trial's design. In this study, we briefly review the current knowledge of genetic and signaling pathways in modulating tumor response to radiotherapy in non‐small cell lung cancer as a case study of data mining application in the challenging cancer treatment problem. We highlight the role that data mining approaches, particularly machine learning methods, can play to improve our understanding of complex systems such as tumor response to radiotherapy. This can potentially result in identification of new prognostic biomarkers or molecular targets to improve response to treatment leading to better personalization of patients' treatment planning by reducing the risk of complications or supporting therapy that is more intensive for those patients likely to benefit. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This article is categorized under: Algorithmic Development > Biological Data Mining Application Areas > Health Care Technologies > Machine Learning
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it