MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259869327 · doi:10.1111/his.12795

Biomarker assessment and molecular testing for prognostication in breast cancer

2015· review· en· W2259869327 on OpenAlex

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

VenueHistopathology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerBiomarkerMolecular pathologyProgesterone receptorBiomarker discoveryCancerMedicineOncologyMolecular biomarkersPathologicalInternal medicineOestrogen receptorTargeted therapyBioinformaticsPathologyEstrogen receptorBiologyGeneProteomicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current treatment of breast cancer incorporates clinical, pathological and molecular data. Oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) define prognosis and identify tumours for targeted therapy, and remain the sole established single-molecule biomarkers defining the minimum breast cancer pathology data set. Ki67 remains one of the most promising yet controversial biomarkers in breast cancer, implemented routinely in some, but not all, pathology departments. Beyond the single-molecule biomarkers, a host of multigene expression tests have been developed to interrogate the driver pathways and biology of individual breast cancers to predict clinical outcome more accurately. A minority of these assays have entered into clinical practice. This review focuses on the established biomarkers of ER, PR and HER2, the controversial but clinically implemented biomarker Ki67 and the currently marketed gene expression signatures.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.287 · 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