MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Utilization and reach of the Fight Colorectal Cancer Late Stage MSS CRC Clinical Trial Finder.

2019· article· en· W2947287592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Reese Garcia, Andrea Dwyer, Sharyn Worrall, Christopher R. Heery, Dustin A. Deming, Al B. Benson, Anjee Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialColorectal cancerCancerStage (stratigraphy)OncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3561 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the most lethal cancer killers worldwide. Recently, research has shown great strides in the treatment of MSI-H mCRC using immunotherapy, however, these treatments have not been effective in MSS patients, who make up a majority of CRC cases. Due to numerous barriers, clinical trial enrollment numbers remain as low as 9% of the eligible populations, despite the reliance of many late stage CRC patients on clinical trials for treatment. Perhaps greatest of these barriers is the lack of meaningful patient-facing clinical trial matching, making advances in MSS mCRC IO clinical research extremely slow. Methods: In May 2017, Fight Colorectal Cancer (FightCRC) launched its web-based trial finder, The Late Stage MSS Trial Finder (TF) with the late Dr. Tom Marsilije, a stage IV CRC patient and researcher, and Flatiron Health. The TF is a publicly available immunotherapy-based repository of clinical trials. An algorithm automatically codes for a subset of trials from ClinicalTrials.gov to be uploaded into the tool, and trained FightCRC advocates follow a strategic logic flow to prioritize trials of highest potential benefit and lowest risk for patients. Results: Between 30 and 100 trials are uploaded into the TF for curation each week. A total of 378 trials have been indexed in the TF to date. In February 2019, a mobile application was introduced. From May 2017 to January 2019, the tool has seen > 15,000 users, yielding 26,000 searches in 105 countries; primarily from the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France. On average, users navigate to 2.5 pages and spend > 2.5 minutes per use. Providers are using this as a tool to find clinical trials and to discuss these options in real time. CRC patient feedback confirmed the platform functionality. Conclusions: The Trial Finder is a unique tool for MSS mCRC patients pursuing clinical trials. The success of the tool may be attributed to patient focused selection of therapies that show promise. The FightCRC late stage MSS CRC trial finder is being widely utilized, in diverse settings. With our patient curators and Medical Advisory Board, FightCRC will improve the search features and outcome tracking with user feedback. The goal for the TF is to address key barriers to patient entry into clinical trials and promote patient-provider discussions to inform decision making.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.183
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.183
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1270.050

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging→French-language works237,207→