MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068732147 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-2901

Abstract 2901: Visualization and delineation of high-risk fields in the oral cavity

2010· article· en· W2068732147 on OpenAlexaff
Denise M. Laronde, Catherine F. Poh, Lewei Zhang, Samson Ng, P. Michele Williams, Miriam P. Rosin, Calum MacAulay

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDysplasiaLesionCancerPathologyDiseaseStage (stratigraphy)BiopsyField cancerizationInternal medicineOncologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Oral cancer is a substantial, though often unrecognized issue globally, with close to 300,000 new cases reported annually. The disease represents a management conundrum: this is a cancer site that is easily examined; yet more that 40% of oral cancers are diagnosed at a late stage when the chance of death is high and treatment can be disfiguring and devastating. Visualization of high-risk fields can be improved by application of contrast agents, such as toluidine blue (TB) or through use of devices that measure alteration to tissue optics, such as fluorescence visualization (FV) both of which could facilitate assessment of abnormalities. This study's objective was to evaluate FV, within a high-risk clinic, to look for associations between loss of autofluorescence (FVL) and alterations to clinical, histological and molecular features and to determine its ability to detect high-risk oral premalignant fields and cancer. Methods: The study involved 170 patients, with 192 oral lesions (64 cancers, 28 severe dysplasia, 66 low-grade (mild/moderate) dysplasia and 34 nondysplasia), being followed in the ongoing Oral Cancer Prediction Longitudinal Study. Four categories of data were collected: 1) demographic and habit information (age, gender, ethnicity and tobacco habits); 2) lesion histology; 3) clinicopathological features at time of biopsy (lesion size, site, appearance, toluidine blue (TB) staining and FV status); and 4) molecular risk patterns of the lesions (loss of heterozygosity, LOH). Results: Demographics and smoking habit were not associated with FV status. Clinicopathological features of the lesion, appearance (P<0.001) and presence at a high-risk site (P=0.018) were significantly associated with FVL. FV status was strongly associated with severity of histology (P<0.001) with 96% of severe dysplasia, and 97% cancer displaying FVL. FVL lesions showed a significantly higher frequency of loss at 3 molecular risk sites, 3p14 (P=0.050), 9p21 (P=0.021), and 17p11-13 (P=0.05), as well as loss at 2 or more arms (P=0.036). Within low-grade dysplasia and nondysplasias, FV status was not associated with clinical features and LOH at 3p, 9p and 17p (although there was a nonspecific trend, P =0.076, 0.054. 0.077, respectively) but was associated with the presence of LOH on multiple (>2) arms (P=0.009). TB positivity was found to be highly associated with FVL (P<0.001). To date, 7 premalignant lesions have progressed to a high-grade lesion or SCC and all were FVL at time of low-grade dysplasia biopsy (FVL and progression, P=0.047). Six of the 7 progressing lesions were TB+. Conclusion: FV was found to be a very useful adjunctive tool when used by experienced clinicians in high-risk clinics. Integrating TB and FV results may aid in the detection of low-grade lesions at risk of progression. Further study of FV in low-grade and nondysplasia with a larger sample size is required. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2901.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.401 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicOral Health Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207