MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343845543 · doi:10.1007/s10549-016-3812-1

Canadian Cancer Trials Group IND197: a phase II study of foretinib in patients with estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer

2016· article· en· W2343845543 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Daniel Rayson, Sasha Lupichuk, Kylea Potvin, Susan Dent, Tamara Shenkier, Sukhbinder Dhesy‐Thind, Susan Ellard, Catherine Prady, Muhammad Salim, Patricia Farmer, Ghasson Allo, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Alison L. Allan, Olga Ludkovski, Maria Bonomi, Dongsheng Tu, Linda Hagerman, Rachel Goodwin, Elizabeth A. Eisenhauer, Penelope A. Bradbury

Bibliographic record

VenueBreast Cancer Research and Treatment · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityHôpital Charles-Le MoyneJuravinski Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkHamilton Health SciencesPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreKingston General HospitalInterior HealthOttawa HospitalBC Cancer AgencyQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchIpsenAstraZenecaCelgeneGenomic HealthCancer Care OntarioPfizerCancer Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePTENCancerBreast cancerOncologyResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsProgressive diseaseMetastatic breast cancerTriple-negative breast cancerEstrogen receptorClinical endpointAdverse effectClinical trialDiseaseBiologyPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBreast Cancer Research and TreatmentSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207