MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808553117 · doi:10.3747/co.25.3761

Circulating Tumour DNA in EGFR-Mutant Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2018· review· en· W2808553117 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael Cabanero, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersPeking UniversityPeking University People's HospitalNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsT790MMedicineLung cancerDigital polymerase chain reactionLiquid biopsyMutationCancer researchTumour heterogeneityCirculating tumor DNACancerTargeted therapyCell-free fetal DNACOLD-PCRComputational biologyBioinformaticsOncologyEpidermal growth factor receptorGeneInternal medicineBiologyPolymerase chain reactionPoint mutationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of targeted therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has made the routine molecular diagnosis of EGFR mutations crucial for optimal patient management. Obtaining tumour tissue for biomarker testing, especially in the setting of re-biopsy, can present many challenges. A potential alternative source of tumour dna is circulating cell-free tumour-derived DNA (CTDNA). Although CTDNA is present in low quantities in plasma, the convenience of sample acquisition and the increasing reliability of detection methods make this approach a promising one. The various performance characteristics of both digital and nondigital platforms are still variable, and a standardized approach is needed that will make those platforms reliable clinical tools for the detection of EGFR sensitizing mutations and resistance mutations, including the T790M resistance mutation. Information derived from ctdna can be used to assess tumour burden, to identify genomic-based resistance mechanisms, and to track dynamic changes during therapy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207