Diagnosing Lung Cancers through Examination of Micro-RNA Biomarkers in Blood, Plasma, Serum and Sputum: A Review and Summary of Current Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Currently, the vast majority of lung cancers are diagnosed at a late stage, when patients become symptomatic leading to dismal, less than 15% five-year survival rates. Evidence has demonstrated that screening computed tomography scans can be used to detect lung cancer, but these scans have high false positive rates. Therefore, there is a continued need for the development of minimally-invasive methods to screen the high risk population and diagnose lung cancer at an earlier, curable stage. One such promising area is the use micro-RNAs. These are short, non-coding RNA molecules that have been shown in previous research to be dysregulated in cancers. This review will focus on the potential use of miRNA levels in various biological fluids (whole blood, plasma, serum, and sputum) and demonstrate their potential utility as screening and diagnostic biomarkers for lung cancer. Current research will be analyzed and compared, and future directions in establishing the use of miRNAs for detecting lung cancer will be discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".