MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Previously documented mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene in a non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) population treated with gefitinib are not associated with response

2006· article· en· W3012425929 on OpenAlexaff
D. Gwyn Bebb, Trevor J. Pugh, Margaret Sutcliffe, Lorena Barclay, John Fee, Richard A. O’Connor, J. Vielkind, Nevin Murray, Janessa Laskin, Marco A. Marra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGefitinibMedicineLung cancerEpidermal growth factor receptorMicrodissectionCancer researchExonPopulationAdenocarcinomaLaser capture microdissectionEGFR inhibitorsOncologyCancerInternal medicineGeneBiologyGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7163 Background: Mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain of EGFR that may correlate with clinical features and response of NSCLC to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been described. But, varying methodologies have contributed to an uncertain relationship between EGFR mutational status and response. This study sought to characterize EGFR mutations in microdissected tumour tissue from pts with advanced NSCLC treated with gefitinib and correlate their clinical data. Methods: Biopsy material from pts treated with gefitinib for advanced NSCLC at the British Columbia Cancer Agency was analyzed. Malignant cells (cytology specimens) or tissue (paraffin embedded biopsies) was reviewed and tumour cells isolated by laser- capture microdissection or manual scrape. Genomic DNA was extracted and exons coding for the EGFR tyrosine kinase domain (18 - 24) were amplified by PCR and sequenced. When insufficient, the priority was 18, 19, 21, followed by 20, 23, 22, and 24. EGFR mutational analyses were correlated with response to gefitinib and clinical features. Results: 61 pts were identified, 14 (23%) radiological responders (CR, PR): 10 Asian, 10 female, 8 non-smokers, 8 adenocarcinoma, 2 BAC. Of 51 tumour samples available, 39 had adequate tissue for sequencing analysis. EGFR copy number by FISH is pending. Laser-capture microdissection allowed for high quality DNA to be extracted almost exclusively from tumour. Exons 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 have been sequenced in 37, 34, 30, 33, 12, 10, and 13 patients, respectively. 4 mutations were identified: 2 in 2 non-smoking Asian pts (exon 19; deletion or substitution of L747-T751) and 2 in Caucasians (exon 20 point mutation resulting in a L798F substitution). None of these pts had a response to gefitinib. Conclusions: As with other series, most responders were female, non-smokers of Asian origin. Our results support the relationship between Asian ethnicity and EGFR mutations but question the role of EGFR mutational status in predicting response. Prospective studies will need to focus the detection of additional genetic features using accurate and reproducible techniques before recommendations for selecting populations to be treated can be made. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→