MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993505171 · doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.75

Prediction of tumour response induced by chemotherapy using modelling of CA-125 kinetics in recurrent ovarian cancer patients

2014· article· en· W1993505171 on OpenAlexaff
Mélanie Wilbaux, Émilie Hénin, Amit M. Oza, Olivier Colomban, Éric Pujade-Lauraine, Gilles Freyer, Michel Tod, Benoît You

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersLigue Contre le Cancer
KeywordsChemotherapyOvarian cancerOncologyMedicineKineticsPharmacodynamicsBiomarkerInternal medicineCancerBiologyPharmacokinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The main objective of the present study was to establish the relationships between CA-125 kinetics and tumour size changes during treatment. METHODS: The data from the CALYPSO-randomised phase III trial, comparing two platinum-based regimens in recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients, was randomly split into a 'learning data set' to estimate model parameters and a 'validation data set' to validate model performances. A kinetic-pharmacodynamic semi-mechanistic model was built to describe tumour size and CA-125 kinetics during chemotherapy. The ability of the model to predict tumour response induced by chemotherapy, based on CA-125 values, was assessed. RESULTS: Data from 535 ROC patients were used to model CA-125 kinetics and tumour size changes during the first 513 days after treatment initiation. Using the validated model, we could predict with accuracy the tumour size changes induced by chemotherapy based on the baseline imaging assessment and longitudinal CA-125 values (mean prediction error: 0.3%, mean absolute prediction error: 10.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Using a semi-mechanistic model, the dynamic relationships between tumour size changes and CA-125 kinetics induced by chemotherapy were established in ROC patients. A modelling approach allowed CA-125 to be assessed as a biomarker for tumour size dynamics, to predict treatment efficacy for research and clinical purposes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207