MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036250447 · doi:10.1097/cco.0b013e328338001f

Molecular targeted therapies in all histologies of head and neck cancers: an update

2010· review· en· W2036250447 on OpenAlexaff
Albiruni RA Razak, Lillian L. Siu, Christophe Le Tourneau

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Oncology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCetuximabMedicineTargeted therapyHead and neck cancerOncologyHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaInternal medicineCancerRadiation therapyClinical trialCancer researchColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviewed the recent developments in molecular targeted therapy in head and neck cancers. A brief summary of other pathways of interest is also enclosed. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of cetuximab in squamous cell head and neck cancer is associated with clinical benefit and, in some cases, survival. However, the use of targeted agents beyond cetuximab in this disease remains investigational. Combination therapy of molecular targeted agents with chemoradiation in the locally advanced setting of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas and nasopharyngeal cancer shows early promising results, but at the expense of increased toxicity. In malignant salivary gland tumors, the evaluation of targeted therapy has been disappointing. New therapeutic targets warrant further evaluation in these cancers. SUMMARY: Despite the encouraging results achieved with antiepidermal growth factor receptor therapy, particularly with cetuximab, targeted therapy trials conducted in head and neck cancers to date have largely lacked efficacy or are associated with significant toxicity. Further research into modulation of other aberrant pathways is needed. The recent identification of improved prognosis among head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients whose tumors harbor the human papilloma virus may allow better treatment selection for these patients, while the identification of a hallmark gene fusion transcript in adenocystic carcinoma may herald new treatment promise.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in OncologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207