MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Osteosarcomas and other cancers of bone

2000· review· en· W1994337775 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Oncology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteosarcomaMedicineCarboplatinIfosfamideChemotherapyOncologyChondrosarcomaDoxorubicinCisplatinSarcomaBone cancerInternal medicineCancer researchPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of several studies suggest that alterations in various cell cycle regulatory genes are involved in the pathogenesis of osteosarcomas. Experiments in animal models provide preliminary data on the feasibility of gene therapy in osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma. Prediction of response to chemotherapy remains a major focus of imaging research. Several clinicopathologic studies have explored the mechanisms underlying multidrug resistance in osteosarcoma patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. HER2/erbB2 expression, linked to poor prognosis, has been proposed as a therapeutic target in osteosarcoma. In clinical studies of osteosarcoma, further data confirm the activity of ifosfamide and carboplatin but provide little support for the use of immunotherapy. A retrospective analysis showed no value for dose intensification of doxorubicin/cisplatin, but the results of a prospective trial should be more informative. Recent evidence confirms that secondary osteosarcomas and malignant fibrous histiocytomas of bone should be treated with aggressive chemotherapy regimens, similar to those used for osteosarcomas.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.302 · 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