MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803026631 · doi:10.3747/co.25.4044

Evidence-Based Best Practices for EGFR T790M Testing in Lung Cancer in Canada

2018· article· en· W2803026631 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Tracy Stockley, Carolina A. Souza, Parneet Cheema, Barbara Melosky, Suzanne Kamel‐Reid, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Alan Spatz, Aly Karsan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreBC Cancer FoundationUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoWilliam Osler Health SystemPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreBC Cancer AgencyOttawa Hospital
FundersUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaAstraZeneca CanadaMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityAlberta Health ServicesAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineOsimertinibT790MLung cancerOncologyEpidermal growth factor receptorInternal medicineGenetic testingCancerPersonalized medicineIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsErlotinibGefitinib

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIS) are recommended as first-line systemic therapy for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) having mutations in the EGFR gene. Resistance to TKIS eventually occurs in all nsclc patients treated with such drugs. In patients with resistance to TKIS caused by the EGFR T790M mutation, the third-generation TKI osimertinib is now the standard of care. For optimal patient management, accurate EGFR T790M testing is required. A multidisciplinary working group of pathologists, laboratory medicine specialists, medical oncologists, a respirologist, and a thoracic radiologist from across Canada was convened to discuss best practices for EGFR T790M mutation testing in Canada. The group made recommendations in the areas of the testing algorithm and the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic aspects of clinical testing for both tissue testing and liquid biopsy circulating tumour DNA testing. The recommendations aim to improve EGFR T790M testing in Canada and to thereby improve patient care.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.158
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.158
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0090.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.312
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207