Canadian ALK (CALK): A pan-Canadian multicenter study to optimize and standardize ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for <i>ALK</i> gene rearrangements.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8096 Background: ALK gene rearrangement (ALK+) has been found in 3-5% of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. FISH is considered the “gold standard” for identification of ALK+ tumors, but its cost-effectiveness and adoption as a screening assay has been debated. Recent reports suggested that ALK IHC may serve as an alternative screening or possibly a diagnostic method. In this context, CALK was initiated to assess the feasibility of implementing ALK IHC and/or FISH assays across Canadian hospitals. Methods: FISH-confirmed 22 ALK+ and 6 ALK- tumors were used as study samples. Unstained sections and scanned images of HE-stained slides from each tumor block were distributed to participating centres. IHC protocols with best signal to noise ratio using the 5A4 (Novocastra) or ALK-1 (Dako) antibodies were developed for various auto-stainers and implemented to suit the existing conditions of the participating centres. A common FISH protocol using the ALK break-apart probe (Abbott Molecular, Chicago, IL) was developed based on published reports. H-score was used to assess IHC. FISH signals were scored in 100 tumor cells/case by 2-3 pre-trained persons. A second round IHC study using newly distributed slides was completed by 8 centres. Results: Independent IHC scores from 12 centres and FISH scores from 11 centres were collected and analysed. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) between centres for IHC and FISH were 0.84 and 0.68, respectively. Following the analysis of initial IHC results, a second round study resulted in improved ICC of 0.94. One of 23 tumors revealed IHC-/FISH+ discrepancy, with the FISH revealing unusual signal configurations that suggested an atypical rearrangement. However, the sensitivity and specificity of FISH results across centres using the 15 aberrant signals cut-off ranged from 86.7-100% and 100%, respectively. Conclusions: Standardization across multiple centres for ALK testing by IHC and FISH can be achieved. IHC detected all FISH+ ALK tumors, except for one discrepant case with atypical FISH finding of unknown clinical implication. The study was supported by a Pfizer Canada grant.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".