MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143171616 · doi:10.1586/17512433.1.1.73

Integrating pharmacogenomics into oncology clinical practice

2008· article· en· W2143171616 on OpenAlexafffund
Sharon Marsh, Michael Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Clinical Pharmacology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationGenome Canada
KeywordsPharmacogenomicsMedicineIrinotecanOncologyGenotypingInternal medicineTrastuzumabTamoxifenClinical trialClinical OncologyClinical PracticeBioinformaticsCancerColorectal cancerMedical physicsPharmacologyGenotypeBreast cancerFamily medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oncology pharmacogenomics has seen a great deal of progress in the past 10 years. The release of the Human Genome Project data and the availability of fast, affordable genotyping platforms has allowed the field to expand and has provided invaluable data for pharmacogenomics research. The introduction of US FDA-approved targeted therapy (trastuzumab), package insert changes (irinotecan and tamoxifen) and the initiation of a genotype-guided clinical trial for cancer therapy (TYMS TSER in rectal cancer), along with panels of DNA and expression markers (Roche AmpliChip(®) and Oncotype Dx™ panel) are paving the way towards the integration of pharmacogenomics into clinical practice.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.444 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Clinical PharmacologySame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207