MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996972368 · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.12.015

Therapeutic options for mucinous ovarian carcinoma

2020· article· en· W2996972368 on OpenAlexafffund
Kylie L. Gorringe, Dane Cheasley, Matthew J. Wakefield, Georgina L. Ryland, Prue E. Allan, Kathryn Alsop, Kaushalya Amarasinghe, Sumitra Ananda, David D.L. Bowtell, Michael Christie, Yoke-Eng Chiew, Michael Churchman, Anna DeFazio, Sián Fereday, C. Blake Gilks, Charlie Gourley, Alison Hadley, Joy Hendley, Sally M. Hunter, Scott H. Kaufmann, Catherine J. Kennedy, Martin Köbel, Cécile Le Page, Jason Li, Richard Lupat, Orla McNally, Jessica N. McAlpine, Jan Pyman, Simone M. Rowley, Carolina Salazar, Hugo Saunders, Timothy Semple, Andrew N. Stephens, Niko Thio, Michelle C. Torres, Nadia Traficante, Magnus Zethoven, Yoland Antill, Ian Campbell, Clare L. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCancer Council TasmaniaNational Institutes of HealthCancer Council South AustraliaMedical Research CouncilPeter MacCallum FoundationHudson Institute of Medical ResearchTerry Fox Research InstituteBC Cancer FoundationCancer Council VictoriaCancer AustraliaAustralian Cancer Research FoundationAustralian GovernmentCancer Institute NSWNational Cancer InstituteOvarian Cancer AustraliaPeter MacCallum Cancer CentreMedical Research and Materiel CommandVictorian Cancer AgencyMayo Foundation for Medical Education and ResearchCancer Council NSWNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMinnesota Ovarian Cancer Alliance
KeywordsMedicineMucinous carcinomaOvarian carcinomaOncologyCarcinomaOvaryInternal medicineGeneral surgeryGynecologyOvarian cancerAdenocarcinomaCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC) is an uncommon ovarian cancer histotype that responds poorly to conventional chemotherapy regimens. Although long overall survival outcomes can occur with early detection and optimal surgical resection, recurrent and advanced disease are associated with extremely poor survival. There are no current guidelines specifically for the systemic management of recurrent MOC. We analyzed data from a large cohort of women with MOC to evaluate the potential for clinical utility from a range of systemic agents. METHODS: We analyzed gene copy number (n = 191) and DNA sequencing data (n = 184) from primary MOC to evaluate signatures of mismatch repair deficiency and homologous recombination deficiency, and other genetic events. Immunohistochemistry data were collated for ER, CK7, CK20, CDX2, HER2, PAX8 and p16 (n = 117-166). RESULTS: Molecular aberrations noted in MOC that suggest a match with current targeted therapies include amplification of ERBB2 (26.7%) and BRAF mutation (9%). Observed genetic events that suggest potential efficacy for agents currently in clinical trials include: KRAS/NRAS mutations (66%), TP53 missense mutation (49%), RNF43 mutation (11%), ARID1A mutation (10%), and PIK3CA/PTEN mutation (9%). Therapies exploiting homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) may not be effective in MOC, as only 1/191 had a high HRD score. Mismatch repair deficiency was similarly rare (1/184). CONCLUSIONS: Although genetically diverse, MOC has several potential therapeutic targets. Importantly, the lack of response to platinum-based therapy observed clinically corresponds to the lack of a genomic signature associated with HRD, and MOC are thus also unlikely to respond to PARP inhibition.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations94
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueGynecologic OncologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207