MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The use of whole-genome sequencing in therapeutic for decision making in patients with advanced malignancies.

2014· article· en· W2907600475 on OpenAlexaff
Howard J. Lim, Yaoqing Shen, Janessa Laskin, Karen A. Gelmon, Daniel J. Renouf, Sophie Sun, Stephen Yip, David Huntsman, Anna V. Tinker, Cheryl Ho, Stephen Chia, Yvonne Li, Peter Eirew, Sreeja Leelakumari, Samuel Aparício, Yussanne Ma, Steven J.M. Jones, Marco A. Marra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIon semiconductor sequencingKRASOncologyInternal medicineCancerColorectal cancerBioinformaticsDNA sequencingGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

11026 Background: We used information obtained from whole genome and transcriptome sequencing to aid in therapeutic decision-making in patients (pts) with advanced cancers. Methods: Eligible pts with incurable cancers with limited or no standard options, had several samples analyzed: a fresh tumor biopsy; a blood sample for normal comparison; and archival tumor tissue when available. Samples underwent both the Ion Torrent AmpliSeq cancer panel analysis and comprehensive DNA (80X) and RNA sequencing followed by in-depth bioinformatic analysis to identify somatic mutations, copy number alterations, structural rearrangements, and corresponding gene expression changes that may be cancer “drivers” or provide informative/diagnosticor actionable targets. Aberrant pathways were matched to drug databases and manual literature reviews were performed to identify drugs that may be useful or potentially contraindicated. A report was generated and discussed in a multidisciplinary team. Results: Between July 2012 - January 2014, 65 pts had consented (including 4 pediatrics cases) and 56 have been sequenced: 18 breast, 8 lung; 4 colorectal, 3 squamous, 3 adrenal; 2 pancreas; 2 sarcomas, 2 neurofibroma, 2 mesothelioma, and 1 of each of nasopharynx, primary unknown, CLL-peripheral mantle cell, parotid, anal, appendix, peripheral T-cell, prostate, ovary, endometrial, glioma, and leiomyoma. The median number of lines of chemo prior to sequencing was 3. The AmpliSeq panel only yielded actionable targets in 40% of cases. The full genomic data was more comprehensive about driver pathways and was informative in 70% of cases. Clinical data is available on 30 pts. In 21 pts data was actionable. In 3 pts, the diagnosis was changed and 9 pts died before the results could be used. Treatments were delivered based on the results in 8 pts, 6 (75%) of these pts derived clinical benefit from treatment based on genomic therapy. Conclusions: Whole genome sequencing based therapeutic decision-making in the management of advanced cancer is feasible. The information is more comprehensive than panels and yields clinically actionable data not identified by panel sequencing. Further studies are needed to determine the utility of this technology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.314 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207