MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886894848 · doi:10.1186/s12885-018-4736-4

Simultaneous detection of lung fusions using a multiplex RT-PCR next generation sequencing-based approach: a multi-institutional research study

2018· article· en· W2886894848 on OpenAlexafffund
Cecily P. Vaughn, José Luís Costa, Harriet Feilotter, Rosella Petraroli, Varun Bagai, Anna Maria Rachiglio, Federica Zito Marino, Bastiaan B.J. Tops, Henriette Kurth, Kazuko Sakai, Andrea Mafficini, Roy R. L. Bastien, Anne Reiman, Delphine Le Corre, Alexander H. Boag, Susan Crocker, Michel Bihl, Astrid Hirschmann, Aldo Scarpa, José Carlos Machado, Hélène Blons, Orla Sheils, Kelli Bramlett, Marjolijn J. L. Ligtenberg, Ian A. Cree, Nicola Normanno, Kazuto Nishio, Pierre Laurent‐Puig

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroQueen's University
KeywordsROS1Fusion geneConcordanceAdenocarcinomaMultiplexLung cancerLungCancer researchMedicineOncologyComputational biologyBiologyPathologyInternal medicineCancerBioinformaticsGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gene fusion events resulting from chromosomal rearrangements play an important role in initiation of lung adenocarcinoma. The recent association of four oncogenic driver genes, ALK, ROS1, RET, and NTRK1, as lung tumor predictive biomarkers has increased the need for development of up-to-date technologies for detection of these biomarkers in limited amounts of material. METHODS: We describe here a multi-institutional study using the Ion AmpliSeq™ RNA Fusion Lung Cancer Research Panel to interrogate previously characterized lung tumor samples. RESULTS: Reproducibility between laboratories using diluted fusion-positive cell lines was 100%. A cohort of lung clinical research samples from different origins (tissue biopsies, tissue resections, lymph nodes and pleural fluid samples) were used to evaluate the panel. We observed 97% concordance for ALK (28/30 positive; 71/70 negative samples), 95% for ROS1 (3/4 positive; 19/18 negative samples), and 93% for RET (2/1 positive; 13/14 negative samples) between the AmpliSeq assay and other methodologies. CONCLUSION: This methodology enables simultaneous detection of multiple ALK, ROS1, RET, and NTRK1 gene fusion transcripts in a single panel, enhanced by an integrated analysis solution. The assay performs well on limited amounts of input RNA (10 ng) and offers an integrated single assay solution for detection of actionable fusions in lung adenocarcinoma, with potential savings in both cost and turn-around-time compared to the combination of all four assays by other methods.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.316
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207