MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895277650 · doi:10.1097/ppo.0000000000000334

Novel Biomarker Approaches in Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma

2018· review· en· W2895277650 on OpenAlexafffund
Tomohiro Aoki, Christian Steidl

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cancer Journal · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCBC Cancer Agency
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBrentuximab vedotinTumor microenvironmentHodgkin lymphomaLymphomaMedicineImmune systemCancer researchBiomarkerDiseaseOncologyImmunologyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is one of the most common lymphomas in the Western world. Advances in the management of cHL have led to high cure rates exceeding 80%. Nevertheless, relapse or refractory disease in a subset of patients and treatment-related toxicity still represents unsolved clinical problems. The introduction of targeted treatments such as PD-1 blockade and the CD30 antibody drug conjugate, brentuximab vedotin, has broadened treatment options in cHL, emphasizing the critical need to identify biomarkers with the goal to provide rationales for treatment selection, increase effective drug utilization, and minimize toxicity. The unique biology of cHL featuring low abundant tumor cells and numerous nonmalignant immune cells in the tumor microenvironment can provide various types of promising biomarkers related to the tumor cells directly, tumor microenvironment cross-talk, and host immune response. Here, we comprehensively review novel biomarkers including circulating tumor DNA and gene expression-based prognostic models that might guide the ideal management of cHL in the future.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.128 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Cancer JournalSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207