MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945567733 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0217036

Reclassification of breast cancer: Towards improved diagnosis and outcome

2019· article· en· W2945567733 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Landry, Zsolt Zádor, Rashida Haq, Michael D. Cusimano

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineOncologyInternal medicineCancerDiseasePopulationEpidemiologyHormone receptorBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The subtyping of breast cancer based on features of tumour biology such as hormonal receptor and HER2 status has led to increasingly patient-specific treatment and thus improved outcomes. However, such subgroups may not be sufficiently informed to best predict outcome and/or treatment response. The incorporation of multi-modal data may identify unexpected and actionable subgroups to enhance disease understanding and improve outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used the cancer registry Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER), which represents 28% of the U.S. population. We included adult female patients diagnosed with breast cancer in 2010. Latent class analysis (LCA), a data-driven technique, was used to identify clinically homogeneous subgroups ("endophenotypes") of breast cancer from receptor status (hormonal receptor and HER2), clinical, and demographic data and each subgroup was explored using Bayesian networks. RESULTS: Included were 44,346 patients, 1257 (3%) of whom had distant organ metastases at diagnosis. Four endophenotypes were identified with LCA: 1) "Favourable biology" had entirely local disease with favourable biology, 2) "HGHR-" had the highest incidence of HR- receptor status and highest grade but few metastases and relatively good outcomes, 3) "HR+ bone" had isolated bone metastases and uniform receptor status (HR+/HER2-), and 4) "Distant organ spread" had high metastatic burden and poor survival. Bayesian networks revealed clinically intuitive interactions between patient and disease features. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified four distinct subgroups of breast cancer using LCA, including one unexpected group with good outcomes despite having the highest average histologic grade and rate of HR- tumours. Deeper understanding of subgroup characteristics can allow us to 1) identify actionable group properties relating to disease biology and patient features and 2) develop group-specific diagnostics and treatments.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207