MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chemoprevention of lung cancer

2004· review· en· W2125457087 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victor Cohen, Fadlo R. Khuri

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerCancer preventionCancerIsotretinoinDiseaseClinical trialCarcinogenesisOncologyInternal medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Lung cancer is one of the major causes of cancer-related deaths. Grim mortality figures argue powerfully for new approaches to control this disease. Chemoprevention is the use of specific natural or synthetic chemical agents to reverse, suppress, or prevent carcinogenic progression to invasive cancer. The current article focuses on the field of lung cancer chemoprevention and recent advances. Lung cancer biology and general principles of prevention strategies are also described. RECENT FINDINGS: Trials in lung cancer chemoprevention have so far produced either neutral or harmful primary end point results whether in the primary, secondary and tertiary settings. The data suggest that lung cancer was not prevented by beta-carotene, alpha-tocopherol, retinal, retinyl palmitate, N-acetylcysteine, or isotretinoin in smokers. The results from the recently completed Canadian study of anethole dithiolethione in smokers with bronchial dysplasia as well secondary analyses of the phase III trials involving selenium and data from the US Intergroup NCI-91-0001 supporting treatment with isotretinoin in never and former smokers are hopeful and may help define new avenues of chemopreventive treatment after scientists and clinicians analyze the information generated. SUMMARY: The concept of chemoprevention in lung cancer is still in its infancy but one day may have a significant impact on the incidence and mortality of this leading cancer threat. An improved understanding of carcinogenesis and cancer prevention mechanisms will no doubt aid in the design of future clinical trials and in the validation of candidate agents as well as the development of new targets. Planned or ongoing trials currently are targeting important molecular markers of lung carcinogenesis and progression including cyclooxygenase-2, the ras-signaling pathway through farnesyl transferase inhibitors and the tyrosine kinase/epidermal growth factor receptor pathway. Until such studies are completed however, no drug or drug combination should be used for lung cancer prevention outside of a clinical study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.007

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.362 · 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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary MedicineSame topicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processesFrench-language works237,207