MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Clinical outcomes after whole genome sequencing in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

2017· article· en· W2890940212 on OpenAlexaff
Erica S. Tsang, Yaoqing Shen, Negar Chooback, Cheryl Ho, Martin Jones, Daniel J. Renouf, Howard J. Lim, Sophie Sun, Stephen Yip, Erin Pleasance, Yussanne Ma, Yongjun Zhao, Andrew J. Mungall, Richard A. Moore, Steven J.M. Jones, Marco A. Marra, Janessa Laskin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreGenome British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerInternal medicineOncologyAdenocarcinomaRegimenLiquid biopsyCohortCancerKRASColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e20563 Background: The Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) program at the BC Cancer Agency integrates whole genome (DNA) and RNA sequencing into practice for metastatic malignancies. We examine patients with metastatic NSCLC and report the prevalence of actionable targets, treatments, and outcomes. Methods: Between 2012-2016, 217 patients had a tumor biopsy and blood sample with comprehensive DNA (80X; 40X normal) and RNA sequencing followed by in-depth bioinformatics to identify potential cancer “drivers” and/or actionable/treatable targets. In NSCLC cases, we compared the progression-free survival (PFS) of “POG-informed therapies” with the PFS of the last regimen prior to POG (PFS ratio). Results: In 29 NSCLC cases, median age was 60.2 years (range 39.4-72.6), 11 were male (38%), and histologies were: adenocarcinoma (93%); squamous cell carcinoma (7%). Potential molecular targets (i.e. cancer “drivers”) were identified in 26 (90%), and 21 (72%) had actionable targets. 13 received POG-informed therapies, of which 3 had no therapy before POG. Of 10 patients with POG-informed therapy, median PFS ratio was 0.94 (IQR 0.2-3.4). 3 (30%) had a PFS ratio ≥1.3, and 3 (30%) had a PFS ratio ≥0.8 and <1.3. Conclusions: In this NSCLC cohort, 30% demonstrated longer PFS with POG-informed therapies. Larger studies will help clarify the role of whole genome analysis in clinical practice. [Table: see text]

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→