MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementing DPYD*2A genotyping in clinical practice, the Quebec experience.

2019· article· en· W2912102267 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine Jolivet, Carl Amireault, Jean-Pierre M. Ayoub, Patrice Beauregard, Normand Blais, Christian Carrier, Alexis‐Simon Cloutier, Alexandra Desnoyers, Jacques Jolivet, Anne‐Sophie Lemay, Frédéric Lemay, François Letendre, Rasmy Loungnarath, Denis Soulières, Mustapha Tehfé, Daniel Viens, Xiaoduan Weng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint JeromeCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-QuébecHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDPYDMedicineMucositisInternal medicineChemotherapyGastroenterologyNeutropeniaGenotypingDiarrheaRashSurgeryPharmacogeneticsGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

650 Background: Fluoropyrimidines (FU) are part of chemotherapy combinations for multiple gastrointestinal cancers. Deficient dihydropyrimidine deshydrogenase (DPD) activity can lead to severe life-threatening toxicities in 3-5% of populations tested. The DPYD*2A polymorphism leading to deficient DPD activity is one of the most studied variants. Methods: We retrospectively performed chart reviews of all patients that tested positive for a heterozygous or homozygous DPYD*2A mutation in samples obtained from patients throughout the province of Quebec (Canada). The study objective was to document the impact of implementing this test in routine clinical practice, including the effects on treatment types, delays and toxicities. Results: 2,617 patients were tested by PCR for the presence of DPYD*2A in a period of 17 months: 25 patients tested positive. All were Caucasian. 24 of the 25 patients were heterozygous (0.92%) and one was homozygous (0.038%). A chart review was available for 20 patients: 15 were tested upfront while five were performed following severe toxicities on the first cycle of FU-based chemotherapy. Of the five patients identified following toxicities, all had grade 4 cytopenias, 80% grade ≥ 3 mucositis, 20% grade 3 rash and 20% grade 3 diarrhea, with an average of 15 days of hospitalisations due to febrile neutropenia. Seven of the 13 patients identified upfront received FU-based chemotherapy at reduced initial doses ranging from 25 to 50%. The average dose during the course of chemotherapy was 50% and two patients reached 100% dosage. No grade ≥ 3 toxicities were observed. DPYD*2A test results were available in an average of 6 days, causing no significant delays in treatment initiation according to 99% of queried physicians. Conclusions: Upfront genotyping before FU-based treatment is feasible in clinical practice. It may prevent severe toxicities and hospitalisations without delaying treatment initiation. The administration of chemotherapy at reduced doses appears to be safe in patients heterozygous for DPYD*2A.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.403 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207