MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2187920436

Where next for gefi tinib in patients with lung cancer

2006· article· en· W2187920436 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fiona Blackhall, Malcolm Ranson, N. Thatcher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineErlotinibLung cancerClinical trialOncologyInternal medicinePlaceboCancerIntensive care medicineAlternative medicineEpidermal growth factor receptorPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

already receiving and benefi ting from it after the negative result of the phase III Iressa Survival Evaluation in Advanced Lung Cancer (ISEL) trial. By contrast, erlotinib, another EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, showed an overall survival benefi t compared with placebo and best supportive care in the National Cancer Institute of Canada’s BR21 trial, and now has full FDA approval for treatment of patients with NSCLC who have progressed after treatment with chemotherapy. Although the ISEL trial result was negative overall, preplanned subgroup analyses showed a signifi cant overall survival benefi t for gefi tinib treatment in never-smokers and in patients of Asian origin. Here, we review the clinical experience with gefi tinib and, in light of the licensing of erlotinib, address the lessons learned, the ongoing trials, and whether scope remains for clinical development of gefi tinib in selected patients.

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)0.003
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.007

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→