MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Targeted therapy in colorectal carcinoma: more than a theory

2008· review· en· W2160701593 on OpenAlexaff
L. Pickering, Sarah Rudman, Paul J. Ross, Myles Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenueColorectal Disease · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerTargeted therapyClinical trialOncologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to examine clinical trial data reporting the use of targeted therapies in colorectal cancer. METHOD: Candidate trials were identified by a comprehensive literature search. RESULTS: The data on the use of targeted therapies; usually combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of colorectal cancer is accumulating rapidly. These new agents will increasingly become incorporated into standard treatment schedules. CONCLUSION: Targeted therapy has moved rapidly from the laboratory to the clinic and is opening up potentially new and exciting areas for the development of the systemic treatment of colorectal cancer.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColorectal DiseaseSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207