MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148641795 · doi:10.1200/jco.2012.47.9220

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Targeting in Head and Neck Cancer: Have We Been Just Skimming the Surface?

2013· letter· en· W2148641795 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron R. Hansen, Lillian L. Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeptidase Inhibition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpidermal growth factor receptorHead and neck cancerHead and neckOncologyCancer researchCancerInternal medicinePathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite extensive research in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) remains the only nonchemotherapeuticmolecular target that has been successfully translated into a biologic therapy with clinical benefit. Targeting this transmembrane tyrosine kinase growth factor receptor in SCCHN is an attractive and rational strategy given that more than 90 % of these tumors overexpress EGFR. The potential value of EGFR as a therapeutic target is also supported by the obser-vation that poor prognostic outcomes have been correlated with in-creased EGFR protein expression or EGFR gene copy number amplification.1-3 Traditional anti-EGFR strategies include monoclo-nal antibodies (MABs) that block the extracellular ligand-binding domain and small molecule inhibitors that reversibly inhibit activa-tion of the cytoplasmic tyrosine kinase. Currently, the only approved targeted therapy in SCCHN is cetuximab, the chimeric immunoglob-

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)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0120.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.439
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

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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations38
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPeptidase Inhibition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207