MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990656479 · doi:10.2147/bctt.s28449

A triple negative breast cancer: what it is not!

2012· article· en· W1990656479 on OpenAlexaff
Suresh Katakkar

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Targets and Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgical oncologyBreast cancerTriple-negative breast cancerOncologyCancerTriple negativeInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The triple negative cancer is an unusual, and at the same time, a unique entity where the discordance rate is almost 18%. That means 18% of Her2 negative results will transform into a Her2 positive status and will have the affinity to spread to the central nervous system (CNS). With the identification of CD44, CD24, and ALDH1, we may be able to determine which group of triple negative breast cancer patients will have CNS metastasis. This case illustrates the Her2 expressing cells have higher CNS affinity. As the original tumor was Her2 negative, if a genomic assay was then done on this patient, we would have identified the potential of CNS involvement. In conclusion, genomic assays should be routinely done on triple negative cancers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer Targets and TherapySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207