MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058238465 · doi:10.1002/cam4.49

Early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at diagnosis: a prospective study using a novel panel of <i><scp>TMPRSS</scp>2:<scp>ETS</scp></i> fusion gene markers

2012· article· en· W2058238465 on OpenAlexafffund
Sam W. Chan, Nam V. Nguyen, Philippe D. Violette, Fadi Brimo, Yosh Taguchi, Armen Aprikian, Junjian Z. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicinePCA3BiopsyProstate biopsyInternal medicineCancerTMPRSS2OncologyProstateOdds ratioProstate-specific antigenProspective cohort studyUrineReceiver operating characteristicDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore noninvasive clinical applications of multiple disease-specific fusion markers recently discovered in prostate cancer to predict the risk of cancer occurrence and aggressiveness at diagnosis. A total of 92 men who were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screened and scheduled for diagnostic biopsy were enrolled for this study. Prospectively collected urine was blind coded for laboratory tests. RNA from urine sediments was analyzed using a panel of 6 TMPRSS2:ETS fusion markers with a sensitive quantitative PCR platform. The pathology reported 39 biopsy-positive cases from 92 patients (42.4%). In urine test, 10 unique combinations of fusion types were detected in 32 of 92 (34.8%) prebiopsy samples. A novel combination of fusion markers, termed Fx (III, IV, ETS), was identified with a sensitivity of 51.3% and an odds ratio of 10.1 in detecting cancer on biopsy. Incorporating a categorical variable of Fx (III, IV, ETS) with urine PCA3 and serum PSA, a regression model was developed to predict biopsy outcomes with an overall accuracy of 77%. Moreover, the overexpression of Fx (III, IV, or ETS) was shown to be an independent predictor to the high-grade cancer, with a predictive accuracy of 80% when coupled with PSA density. The individualized risk scores further stratified a high-risk group that is composed of 92% high-grade cancers and a low-risk group that harbors mainly clinically insignificant cancers. In conclusion, we have identified a novel combination of fusion types very specific to the clinically significant prostate cancer and developed effective regression models to predict biopsy outcomes and aggressive cancers at diagnosis.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207