MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Genomic and clinical determinants of recurrence in localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

2019· article· en· W2922177938 on OpenAlexaff
Ziad Bakouny, Sarah Abou Alaiwi, Amin H. Nassar, Ronan Flippot, Pier Vitale Nuzzo, Dominick Bossé, Xiao X. Wei, Bradley A. McGregor, Lauren C. Harshman, Sabina Signoretti, David J. Kwiatkowski, Toni K. Choueiri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClear cell renal cell carcinomaBAP1Internal medicinePTENProportional hazards modelOncologyRenal cell carcinomaCancerPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

664 Background: Multiple clinical risk scores and gene expression models have predicted recurrence in localized ccRCC. However, few studies explored genomic alterations (GA) predicting recurrence. Methods: We assessed genomic and clinical correlates of disease-free survival (DFS) in surgically treated localized ccRCC using a targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) platform (Oncopanel/PROFILE) and publicly available NGS and clinical data from TCGA. Univariable and stepwise multivariable Cox regression models (stratified by database) were performed. Results: 478 patients (123 patients from our institution and 355 patients from TCGA) were included. 150 (31.4%) patients experienced a DFS event (recurrence or death) and 94 (19.7%) died at 3.1 years (yrs) of median follow-up. Median DFS was 6.3 (5.4-7.2) yrs and the 5-yr overall survival rate was 70.8% (64.9-76.7). On multivariable analysis, 4 clinical factors and mutations in 3 genes were significantly associated with recurrence (Table). Conclusions: Our study suggests that PTEN, BAP1 and KDM5C GA may improve on clinical factors for prediction of localized ccRCC recurrence. Further work is needed to determine if these GA could improve existing validated risk models. [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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→