MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417583025 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/now101

Pediatric high-grade glioma: biologically and clinically in need of new thinking

2016· review· en· W2417583025 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Jones, Matthias A. Karajannis, David Jones, Mark W. Kieran, Michelle Monje, Suzanne J. Baker, Oren J. Becher, Yoon-Jae Cho, Nalin Gupta, Cynthia Hawkins, Darren Hargrave, Daphne A. Haas‐Kogan, Nada Jabado, Xiao‐Nan Li, Sabine Mueller, Theo Nicolaides, Roger J. Packer, Anders I. Persson, Joanna J. Phillips, Erin F. Simonds, James M. Stafford, Yujie Tang, Stefan M. Pfister, William A. Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersUniversity of California, San FranciscoCancer Research UKBrain Tumour CharityRosetrees TrustDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumNational Brain Tumor Society
KeywordsClinical trialGliomaPaceDiseasePerspective (graphical)BioinformaticsMedicineNeuroscienceBiologyInternal medicineCancer researchComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-grade gliomas in children are different from those that arise in adults. Recent collaborative molecular analyses of these rare cancers have revealed previously unappreciated connections among chromatin regulation, developmental signaling, and tumorigenesis. As we begin to unravel the unique developmental origins and distinct biological drivers of this heterogeneous group of tumors, clinical trials need to keep pace. It is important to avoid therapeutic strategies developed purely using data obtained from studies on adult glioblastoma. This approach has resulted in repetitive trials and ineffective treatments being applied to these children, with limited improvement in clinical outcome. The authors of this perspective, comprising biology and clinical expertise in the disease, recently convened to discuss the most effective ways to translate the emerging molecular insights into patient benefit. This article reviews our current understanding of pediatric high-grade glioma and suggests approaches for innovative clinical management.

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)0.001
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations364
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207