MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141205256 · doi:10.1586/14737140.2015.1096203

Optimal therapy for desmoid tumors: current options and challenges for the future

2015· review· en· W2141205256 on OpenAlex
Mushriq Al‐Jazrawe, Magdalene Au, Benjamin A. Alman

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

VenueExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSoft tissue tumor case studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWatchful waitingRadiation therapyFibromatosisCryoablationChemotherapyOncologyInternal medicinePathologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desmoid tumors, or aggressive fibromatosis, are rare, locally infiltrative neoplasms caused by mutations that activate β-catenin. Although these tumors do not metastasize, they are difficult to manage due to variability in tumor presentation and behavior. A variety of treatment options exist, including surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, isolated limb perfusion, cryoablation and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Treatment-induced morbidity and poor local control rates, combined with spontaneous stabilization of some desmoid tumors, have allowed watchful waiting to recently emerge as a front-line management option. This has emphasized the need to better understand tumor behavior in order to differentiate between tumors that may stabilize and those that may progress. Here, we review the most recent findings in desmoid tumor biology and treatment options for this enigmatic disease.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.284 · 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