MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884869701 · doi:10.3747/co.25.3733

Brain Metastases in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Are Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Checkpoint Inhibitors Now Viable Options?

2018· review· en· W2884869701 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sami Morin-Ben Abdallah, Annie Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImmunotherapyLung cancerTyrosine kinaseChemotherapyOncologyCentral nervous systemTyrosine-kinase inhibitorDiseaseRadiation therapyAnaplastic lymphoma kinaseInternal medicineCancerCancer researchReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant progress has been made in the treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the prognosis of patients with brain metastases remains poor. Resection and radiation therapy remain standard options. This issue is an important one because 10% of patients with NSCLC have brain metastases at diagnosis, and 25%–40% develop brain metastases during their disease. Standard chemotherapy does not cross the blood–brain barrier. However, there is new hope that tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIS) used in patients with identified targetable mutations such as mutations of EGFR and rearrangements of ALK could have activity in the central nervous system (CNS). Furthermore, immunotherapy is increasingly becoming a standard option for patients with NSCLC, and interest about the intracranial activity of those agents is growing. This review presents current data about the CNS activity of the available major TKIS and immunotherapy agents.

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)0.000
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations56
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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