MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gene Expression Profiling of Breast Cancer

2008· review· en· W2128909638 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Pathology Mechanisms of Disease · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBreast cancerGene expression profilingDNA microarrayComputational biologyMicroarrayProfiling (computer programming)Gene expressionBioinformaticsGeneMedicineCancerBiologyComputer scienceInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA microarray platforms for gene expression profiling were invented relatively recently, and breast cancer has been among the earliest and most intensely studied diseases using this technology. The molecular signatures so identified help reveal the biologic spectrum of breast cancers, provide diagnostic tools as well as prognostic and predictive gene signatures, and may identify new therapeutic targets. Data are best presented in an open access format to facilitate external validation, the most crucial step in identifying robust, reproducible gene signatures suitable for clinical translation. Clinically practical applications derived from full expression profile studies already in use include reduced versions of microarrays representing key discriminatory genes and therapeutic targets, quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays, or immunohistochemical surrogate panels (suitable for application to standard pathology blocks). Prospective trials are now underway to determine the value of such tools for clinical decision making in breast cancer; these efforts may serve as a model for using such approaches in other tumor types.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.313 · 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