MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622532295 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-0115

Precision Medicine in Pediatric Oncology: Translating Genomic Discoveries into Optimized Therapies

2017· review· en· W2622532295 on OpenAlexaff
Thai Hoa Tran, Avanthi Tayi Shah, Mignon L. Loh

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecision medicineEpigeneticsMedicinePersonalized medicineCancerDiseaseGenomicsBioinformaticsTargeted therapyOncologyComputational biologyInternal medicineBiologyPathologyGenomeGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Survival of children with cancers has dramatically improved over the past several decades. This success has been achieved through improvement of combined modalities in treatment approaches, intensification of cytotoxic chemotherapy for those with high-risk disease, and refinement of risk stratification incorporating novel biologic markers in addition to traditional clinical and histologic features. Advances in cancer genomics have shed important mechanistic insights on disease biology and have identified “driver” genomic alterations, aberrant activation of signaling pathways, and epigenetic modifiers that can be targeted by novel agents. Thus, the recently described genomic and epigenetic landscapes of many childhood cancers have expanded the paradigm of precision medicine in the hopes of improving outcomes while minimizing toxicities. In this review, we will discuss the biologic rationale for molecularly targeted therapies in genomically defined subsets of pediatric leukemias, solid tumors, and brain tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 23(18); 5329–38. ©2017 AACR.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.556
GPT teacher head0.660
Teacher spread0.103 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207