MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528747356 · doi:10.1016/j.eucr.2016.08.010

Potential Impact on Clinical Decision Making via a Genome-Wide Expression Profiling: A Case Report

2016· article· en· W2528747356 on OpenAlexaff
Hyun Kim, Mohammed Alshalalfa, Jean Hoffman‐Censits, Costas D. Lallas, Elai Davicioni, Jianqing Lin, Ruth Birbe, Nicholas Erho, Jonathan Lehrer, Hussam Al-Deen Ashab, Mandeep Takhar, Anders Olson, Lucia L.C. Lam, William K. Kelly, Karen E. Knudsen, Chellappagounder Thangavel, Roland Seiler, Felix Y. Feng, Edward M. Schaeffer, Edouard J. Trabulsi, Leonard G. Gomella, Mark Hurwitz, Adam P. Dicker, Robert B. Den

Bibliographic record

VenueUrology Case Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaGenome British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerGenomicsProfiling (computer programming)Clinical trialClinical decision makingOncologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineIntensive care medicineGenomeCancerGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Management of men with prostate cancer is fraught with uncertainty as physicians and patients balance efficacy with potential toxicity and diminished quality of life. Utilization of genomics as a prognostic biomarker has improved the informed decision-making process by enabling more rationale treatment choices. Recently investigations have begun to determine whether genomic information from tumor transcriptome data can be used to impact clinical decision-making beyond prognosis. Here we discuss the potential of genomics to alter management of a patient who presented with high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma. We suggest that this information help selecting patients for advanced imaging, chemotherapies, or clinical trial.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrology Case ReportsSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207