MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122788909 · doi:10.1586/era.10.227

2010 Society for Neuro-Oncology Annual Meeting: a report of selected studies

2011· article· en· W2122788909 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manmeet S. Ahluwalia

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLomustineMedicineTemozolomideBevacizumabIrinotecanOncologyInternal medicineSunitinibProgression-free survivalGlioblastomaOverall survivalRadiation therapyChemotherapyCancerColorectal cancerVincristineCancer researchCyclophosphamide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of important studies were presented at the Society for Neuro-Oncology annual meeting in Montréal, Canada, on 18-21 November 2010. Cediranib as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine did not show increased efficacy when compared with lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). Addition of temozolomide (TMZ) or irinotecan (CPT) to bevacizumab (BEV) in patients with recurrent GBM was well tolerated, with similar efficacy to BEV alone. The addition of BEV to radiation and TMZ in newly diagnosed GBM improved progression-free survival but did not improve overall survival. TMZ alone may be a reasonable approach in elderly GBM patients with poor performance status. Two Phase II trials with sunitinib and vatalanib showed a hint of activity in patients with recurrent or progressive meningiomas.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.019
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anticancer TherapySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207