Abstract 3952: Rapid autopsy programs: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A Rapid Autopsy Program (RAP) is an advanced method of biospecimen procurement whereby autopsies are conducted within 2-6 hours postmortem in order to obtain substantial amounts of high-quality, fresh tissue in support of current and future research. Rapid autopsies were first introduced in the late 1980’s and are still a relatively novel approach, but growing in popularity as a viable alternative to traditional tissue sampling methods for cancer research. In oncology, primary tumour, metastatic, and normal tissue from uninvolved organ sites are sampled and can be subsequently snap frozen in liquid nitrogen or preserved in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks. Fresh tissue can also be distributed immediately to cancer researchers allowing for analyses incompatible with archival frozen or fixed tissue. Tissue degradation has been found to be minimized in different tissue types by decreasing the postmortem interval – the time between death and tissue preservation. Institutions capable of executing the collection and maintenance of such a repository of biospecimens are a monumental asset to clinicians and researchers who are interested in investigating tumour biology, metastatic disease, and treatment response. In addition to the clear scientific benefits of RAPs, these programs offer a unique opportunity for palliative cancer patients to donate their bodies to aid cancer research. This systematic review was conducted to examine the scope of impact of RAPs thus far on biomedical, translational, and clinical research in the field of oncology, in hopes to inform best practice for collection and use of biospecimen in oncology. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Ovid MEDLINE will be searched with devised strategies and screened from inception until present. In addition, grey literature will be reviewed. Two independent reviewers will be responsible for study selection and data extraction. The results of the systematic review are pending. Citation Format: Brian Li, Neesha Dhani, WeiYang Yu, Shawn Khan, Elysia Grose. Rapid autopsy programs: A systematic review [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 3952. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-3952
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 | 0.009 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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".