MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794215802 · doi:10.1177/1535370217750087

Liquid biopsy and its role in an advanced clinical trial for lung cancer

2018· review· en· W2794215802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Biology and Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationHamilton Health Sciences FoundationArkansas Research AllianceU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsLiquid biopsyLung cancerMedicineBiopsyCancerClinical trialLungOncologyPathologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liquid biopsy methodologies, for the purpose of plasma genotyping of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of solid tumors, are a new class of novel molecular assays. Such assays are rapidly entering the clinical sphere of research-based monitoring in translational oncology, especially for thoracic malignancies. Potential applications for these blood-based cfDNA assays include: (i) initial diagnosis, (ii) response to therapy and follow-up, (iii) tumor evolution, and (iv) minimal residual disease evaluation. Precision medicine will benefit from cutting-edge molecular diagnostics, especially regarding treatment decisions in the adjuvant setting, where avoiding over-treatment and unnecessary toxicity are paramount. The use of innovative genetic analysis techniques on individual patient tumor samples is being pursued in several advanced clinical trials. Rather than using a categorical treatment plan, the next critical step of therapeutic decision making is providing the "right" cancer therapy for an individual patient, including correct dose and timeframe based on the molecular analysis of the tumor in question. Per the 21st Century Cures Act, innovative clinical trials are integral for biomarker and drug development. This will include advanced clinical trials utilizing: (i) innovative assays, (ii) molecular profiling with cutting-edge bioinformatics, and (iii) clinically relevant animal or tissue models. In this paper, a mini-review addresses state-of-the-art liquid biopsy approaches. Additionally, an on-going advanced clinical trial for lung cancer with novelty through synergizing liquid biopsies, co-clinical trials, and advanced bioinformatics is also presented. Impact statement Liquid biopsy technology is providing a new source for cancer biomarkers, and adds new dimensions in advanced clinical trials. Utilizing a non-invasive routine blood draw, the liquid biopsy provides abilities to address perplexing issues of tumor tissue heterogeneity by identifying mutations in both primary and metastatic lesions. Regarding the assessment of response to cancer therapy, the liquid biopsy is not ready to replace medical imaging, but adds critical new information; for instance, through a temporal assessment of quantitative circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assay results, and importantly, the ability to monitor for signs of resistance, via emerging clones. Adjuvant therapy may soon be considered based on a quantitative cfDNA assay. As sensitivity and specificity of the technology continue to progress, cancer screening and prevention will improve and save countless lives by finding the cancer early, so that a routine surgery may be all that is required for a definitive cure.

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.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.426 · 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