MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013612418 · doi:10.4137/cmo.s4259

Imatinib Mesylate: Past Successes and Future Challenges in the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

2011· article· en· W2013612418 on OpenAlexaff
Doran Ksienski

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine Insights Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaIsland Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImatinib mesylateGiSTImatinibMedicinePDGFRATyrosine-kinase inhibitorOncologyTargeted therapyInternal medicineAdverse effectTyrosine kinaseStromal tumorCancer researchStromal cellGastroenterologyReceptorCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Just over a decade ago, gastrointestinal tumours were a poorly understood mesenchymal neoplasm unsuccessfully treated with chemotherapy. Cytotoxic therapy for advanced disease yielded response rates of 10% and median survival of just 18 months. However, the discovery of KIT and platelet derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) mutations as oncogenic drivers of most gastrointestinal tumours, paved the way for targeted therapy. Imatinib mesylate, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, produces a clinical benefit rate (complete response, partial response, and stable disease) of more than 80% in metastatic setting and a median survival of 57 months. Imatinib is now also approved in adult patients following resection of KIT-positive GIST. Major insights into the mechanism of action of imatinib, unique pharmacokinetics, drug resistance, and management of low grade but chronic adverse effects continue to be made.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Medicine Insights OncologySame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207