MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811073750 · doi:10.1111/ijlh.12882

Recent advances in cytogenetic characterization of multiple myeloma

2018· review· en· W2811073750 on OpenAlexaff
Debra Saxe, Eul‐Ju Seo, Mélanie Beaulieu Bergeron, Jin‐Yeong Han

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Laboratory Hematology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDong-A University
KeywordsMultiple myelomaFluorescence in situ hybridizationCytogeneticsRisk stratificationBone marrowMicroarrayMedicinePathologyOncologyBioinformaticsBiologyInternal medicineComputational biologyGeneGeneticsChromosomeGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The detection of cytogenetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma (MM) has received more importance over last years for risk stratification and the new risk-adapted treatment strategies. Conventional G-banding analysis should be included in a routine procedure for the initial diagnostic workup for patients suspected of MM. However, the detection of chromosomal abnormalities in MM by conventional cytogenetics is limited owing to the low proliferative activity of malignant plasma cells as well as the low number of plasma cells in bone marrow specimens. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or microarray-based technologies can overcome some of those drawbacks and detect specific target arrangements as well as chromosomal copy number changes. In this review, we will discuss different cytogenetic approaches and compare their strength and weakness to provide genetic information for risk stratification and prediction of outcome in MM patients.

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)0.001
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 score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.349 · 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
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

Citations74
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Laboratory HematologySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207