MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793281906 · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy058

Final validation of the ProMisE molecular classifier for endometrial carcinoma in a large population-based case series

2018· article· en· W2793281906 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefan Kommoss, Melissa K. McConechy, F. Kommoss, Samuel Leung, Anne-Kathrin Bunz, Jamie Magrill, Heidi Britton, Friederike Grevenkamp, Anthony N. Karnezis, Winnie Yang, Amy Lum, B. Krämer, Florin‐Andrei Taran, Annette Staebler, S. Lax, S Brücker, David G. Huntsman, C. Blake Gilks, Jessica N. McAlpine, Aline Talhouk

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineClassifier (UML)CarcinomaSeries (stratigraphy)PopulationOncologyGynecologyInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: We have previously developed and confirmed a pragmatic molecular classifier for endometrial cancers; ProMisE (Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer). Inspired by the Cancer Genome Atlas, ProMisE identifies four prognostically distinct molecular subtypes and can be applied to diagnostic specimens (biopsy/curettings) enabling earlier informed decision-making. We have strictly adhered to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines for the development of genomic biomarkers, and herein present the final validation step of a locked-down classifier before clinical application. Patients and methods: We assessed a retrospective cohort of women from the Tübingen University Women's Hospital treated for endometrial carcinoma between 2003 and 2013. Primary outcomes of overall, disease-specific, and progression-free survival were evaluated for clinical, pathological, and molecular features. Results: Complete clinical and molecular data were evaluable from 452 women. Patient age ranged from 29 to 93 (median 65) years, and 87.8% cases were endometrioid histotype. Grade distribution included 282 (62.4%) G1, 75 (16.6%) G2, and 95 (21.0%) G3 tumors. 276 (61.1%) patients had stage IA disease, with the remaining stage IB [89 (19.7%)], stage II [26 (5.8%)], and stage III/IV [61 (13.5%)]. ProMisE molecular classification yielded 127 (28.1%) MMR-D, 42 (9.3%) POLE, 55 (12.2%) p53abn, and 228 (50.4%) p53wt. ProMisE was a prognostic marker for progression-free (P = 0.001) and disease-specific (P = 0.03) survival even after adjusting for known risk factors. Concordance between diagnostic and surgical specimens was highly favorable; accuracy 0.91, κ 0.88. Discussion: We have developed, confirmed, and now validated a pragmatic molecular classification tool (ProMisE) that provides consistent categorization of tumors and identifies four distinct prognostic molecular subtypes. ProMisE can be applied to diagnostic samples and thus could be used to inform surgical procedure(s) and/or need for adjuvant therapy. Based on the IOM guidelines this classifier is now ready for clinical evaluation through prospective clinical trials.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations756
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207