MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068794772 · doi:10.3109/10428194.2010.500046

Prognostic biomarkers in malignant lymphomas

2010· review· en· W2068794772 on OpenAlexaff
Randy D. Gascoyne, Andreas Rosenwald, Sibrand Poppema, Georg Lenz

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphomaTumor microenvironmentFollicular lymphomaDiseaseTranslational researchChemokineMedicineCancer researchBiologyBioinformaticsComputational biologyImmunologyPathologyImmune systemTumor cells

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has recently been a rapid expansion in research aimed at identifying biomarkers that could improve the prognosis for patients with various subtypes of malignant lymphoma. Genomic and genetic studies have led to the identification of biological and clinical subgroups of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas with distinct underlying molecular features, divergent activation of oncogenetic pathways, and clinical course. Molecular studies of follicular lymphoma have suggested complex interactions between malignant cells and the surrounding immunological network that could affect disease progression. Moreover, the inflammatory cells of Hodgkin lymphoma have been shown to produce a complex network of cytokines and chemokines that provide a permissive microenvironment for tumor growth. Research into specific biomarkers and signaling pathways of malignant lymphomas might therefore result in the identification of novel targets for future therapeutic strategies. As gene expression profiling techniques are not yet feasible in the clinical laboratory, studies have aimed to translate the findings into more widely applicable techniques that might allow this research to be applied to routine clinical practice. This review focuses on recent advances in translational and clinical research on biomarkers in malignant lymphomas.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), 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 score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.267 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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 venueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphomaSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207