MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Validation of the Decipher prostate cancer classifier for predicting 10-year postoperative metastasis from analysis of diagnostic needle biopsy specimens.

2016· article· en· W2591113678 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Magi‐Galluzzi, Kasra Yousefi, Zaid Haddad, Beatrix Palmer-Aronsten, Lucia L.C. Lam, Christine Buerki, Jianbo Li, Michael W. Kattan, Andrew J. Stephenson, Elai Davicioni, Eric A. Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsGenome British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDECIPHERProstatectomyProstate cancerBiopsyCohortMetastasisProstateProstate biopsyCancerOncologyInternal medicinePathologyRadiologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

59 Background: Accurate riskstratification after diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) is key to optimal treatment decision-making. Decipher is an extensively validated genomic classifier of metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP). Here, we evaluate its ability to predict metastasis from analysis of prostate needle biopsy diagnostic tumor tissue specimens in a cohort of intermediate risk PCa patients treated with RP. Methods: Fifty-seven patients with available diagnostic biopsy specimens were identified from a previously reported post-RP validation study of Decipher in a cohort of 169 patients treated at Cleveland Clinic. The core with at least 1mm tumor of the highest Gleason grade was sampled and subjected to whole transcriptome analysis. Decipher was calculated based on a locked random forest model. Cox multivariable (MVA) proportional hazards model and survival c-index were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher. Results: 61% of patients had biopsy Gleason score 6 and 67% of patients had NCCN intermediate risk disease. With a median 8 years follow up, 8 patients metastasized and 3 of these patients died of PCa. Decipher had a c-index of 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.95) compared to 0.58 (95% CI, 0.18-0.91) for biopsy Gleason score and 0.57 (0.57; 95% CI, 0.23-0.89) for preoperative PSA at 10 years post-RP for prediction of metastasis. A combined model consisting of Decipher, preoperative PSA, and Gleason score had a c-index of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.68-0.96). On MVA, Decipher was the only significant predictor of metastasis when adjusting for age, preoperative PSA and biopsy Gleason score (Decipher hazard ratio per 10% increase: 1.72; 95% CI, 1.04–2.83; P = 0.02). Conclusions: Decipher was able to predict metastatic outcome from diagnostic biopsy specimens in a cohort of primarily intermediate risk men treated with RP. This additional genomic information may help identify patients who may not be optimal candidates for active surveillance and better identify appropriate first line therapy for men with intermediate risk disease.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.333 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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