MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065628269 · doi:10.1080/10428190600822128

Ten years and counting: so what do we know about t(4;14)(p16;q32) multiple myeloma

2006· review· en· W2065628269 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsChromosomal translocationMultiple myelomaMechanism (biology)Outcome (game theory)ChromosomeDiseaseOncologyBiologyMedicineGeneticsInternal medicineImmunologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple myeloma is a genetically heterogenous disease with a wide variety of characterized genetic aberrations. Until recently, the impact of these aberrations on patient outcome was not known. However, in the last 5-10 years, several genetic markers have been linked to patient outcome. One of the strongest predictors of outcome identified to date is t(4;14)(p16;q32). Although this translocation is tightly linked to chromosome 13 deletions, another poor prognosis marker, it is becoming apparent that the translocation and not the deletion of 13 is the important factor. Unfortunately, despite the known association with outcome, an understanding of the mechanism(s) whereby the translocation contributes to developing and maintaining this aggressive form of myeloma remains elusive.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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