MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965686296 · doi:10.1080/10937404.2019.1642593

Development of a database on key characteristics of human carcinogens

2019· review· en· W2965686296 on OpenAlexafffund
Mustafa Al‐Zoughool, Michael G. Bird, Jerry M. Rice, Robert A. Baan, Mélissa Billard, Nicholas Birkett, Daniel Krewski, Jan M. Zielinski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWorld Health Organization
KeywordsCarcinogenInternational agencyHuman healthDatabaseComputer scienceToxicologyEnvironmental healthBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A database on mechanistic characteristics of human carcinogenic agents was developed by collecting mechanistic information on agents identified as human carcinogens (Group 1) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in the IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. A two-phase process is described for the construction of the database according to 24 toxicological endpoints, derived from appropriate test systems that were acquired from data obtained from the mechanisms sections of the IARC Monographs (Section 4) and a supplementary PubMed search. These endpoints were then aligned with 10 key characteristics of human carcinogens that reflect the broader attributes of these agents relating to the development of cancer in humans. The considerations involved in linking of toxicological endpoints to key characteristics are described and specific examples of the determination of key characteristics for six specific agents (tamoxifen, hepatitis B virus, arsenic, ultraviolet and solar radiation, tobacco smoking, and dioxin) are provided. Data for humans and animals were tabulated separately, as were results for in-vivo and for in-vitro sources of information. The database was constructed to support a separate analysis of the expression of these endpoints by 86 Group 1 carcinogens, in-vivo and in-vitro along with an analysis of the key characteristics of these agents.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part BSame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207