MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748571563 · doi:10.1373/jalm.2016.021824

Half-Century of Cancer Biomarkers: Lessons from the Past and Projections for the Future

2017· article· en· W2748571563 on OpenAlexaff
Panagiota S. Filippou, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A handful of cancer biomarkers are used widely in clinical practice, mainly for aiding in diagnosis and for monitoring therapy. These biomarkers include α-fetoprotein (AFP),4 carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), prostate-specific antigen, and the carbohydrate antigens CA125, CA19.9, and CA15.3. Other, more specialized cancer biomarkers are used less frequently. Molecular/genomic markers will not be discussed here. An examination of the history of these biomarkers reveals that they were discovered in the mid-1960s and 1970s (AFP, CEA) or in the 1980s, thanks to the monoclonal antibody technology revolution. The success of these markers in clinical practice sparked interest to discover new cancer biomarkers that could be applied for population screening, early diagnosis, …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Applied Laboratory MedicineSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207