MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract IA11: Using Molecular Profiling Strategies in Clinical Trials to Understand Resistance Mechanisms in the Era of Personalized Cancer Medicine

2012· article· en· W2008413774 on OpenAlexaff
Lillian L. Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVemurafenibMedicineAcquired resistanceDruggabilityDrug resistanceClinical trialMelanomaOncologyPrecision medicineCancerCancer researchIpilimumabInternal medicineBioinformaticsBiologyMetastatic melanomaPathologyImmunotherapyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Resistance to molecularly targeted agents remains a key challenge in cancer therapeutics. Even in the setting of oncogenically addicted tumor types matched with potent and specific kinase inhibitors, the duration of drug response is limited. For example, in the phase III trial of vemurafenib versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced malignant melanoma harboring BRAF V600E mutations, 48% of patients in the vermurafenib arm achieved an objective response with a progression-free survival of 5.3 months (Chapman et al. N Engl J Med 2011). A caveat to this clearly positive clinical trial is that there are patients whose tumors have the same mutations who did not respond to vemurafenib and amongst those who did, the duration of response remains limited. In tumors that harbor driver mutations or other genetic aberrations, mechanisms of resistance are of relevance, including both primary resistance that renders them insensitive to specific inhibitors, and evolved/acquired resistance that results in tumor growth despite initial sensitivity. Comprehensive molecular profiling of pre-treatment tumor samples and at progression would be informative to offer insight into such mechanisms of primary and evolved/acquired resistance and guide clinical trial designs to counteract them. Combinatorial strategies may be considered upfront for patients who have tumor characteristics suggestive of primary resistance. For patients with sensitive disease which evolve/acquire resistance during treatment, a repeat tumor biopsy may help detect newly emerged aberrations that are potentially druggable. Additional areas of interest in defining tumor resistance include the observations that same mutation may have different degrees of functionality in different tumor types (e.g. BRAF mutations in melanoma versus colorectal cancer) and different mutations of the same gene may confer different drug sensitivities (e.g. activating and inactivating BRAF mutations), These context-dependent phenomena further complicate the planning of histology-agnostic, mutation-specific clinical trials using targeted agents. Efforts to provide detailed tumor molecular profiling information in clinical trials are relevant to help distinguish signatures of sensitivity versus resistance.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.507
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.087 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207