MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Validation of a genomic classifier that predicts metastatic disease progression in men with biochemical recurrence post radical prostatectomy.

2013· article· en· W2590432301 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley E. Ross, Mercedeh Ghadessi, Elai Davicioni, Anamaria Crisan, Christine Buerki, Nicholas Erho, Anirban P. Mitra, Darby J. S. Thompson, Timothy J. Triche, Felix Y. Feng, Edward M. Schaeffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsGenome British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatectomyProstate cancerBiochemical recurrencebreakpoint cluster regionInternal medicineProportional hazards modelMetastasisCohortOncologyContext (archaeology)UrologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5033 Background: Almost 50,000 men per year will present with biochemical recurrence (BCR) following local treatment for prostate cancer. These men with rising PSAs as the lone indicator of recurrence present a management dilemma due to their varied outcomes with only a proportion developing subsequent metastatic disease. Thus, there is a clear need to improve patient risk stratification in this context. Here, we evaluate Decipher, a genomic classifier (GC) in men with BCR following radical prostatectomy (RP) for its ability to predict metastasis. Methods: The 22-marker GC was validated in a prospectively designed case-cohort study of 1,010 clinically high-risk RP patients. 219 patients, including 85 who developed BCR at least 6 months post-RP were subjected to microarray analysis and GC scores were generated. Survival ROC curves, weighted Cox proportional hazards, and decision curves were used to compare the performance of the GC to Gleason score (GS), PSA doubling time (PSAdT) and time to BCR (ttBCR). Results: GC scores significantly stratified these men into those who would or would not develop metastasis after BCR (8% versus 40% of patients developed metastasis at 3 years following BCR depending on GC score category, p<0.001). The AUC for GC was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86), compared to that of GS 0.64 (0.58-0.70), PSAdT 0.69 (0.61-0.77) and ttBCR 0.52 (0.46-0.59). In decision curve analysis, the GC had the highest overall ‘net benefit’ and in multivariable modeling with clinicopathologic variables, only GC (p=0.006) and GS (p=0.046) scores were significant predictors of metastasis. Conclusions: When compared to clinicopathologic variables, the GC better predicted metastatic progression among men with BCR following RP. While confirmatory studies in additional patient populations are required, these results suggest that use of the GC can allow for better selection of men requiring additional treatment at the time of BCR.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→