MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015552022 · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2020.03.299

JSCO—ESMO—ASCO—JSMO—TOS: international expert consensus recommendations for tumour-agnostic treatments in patients with solid tumours with microsatellite instability or NTRK fusions

2020· article· en· W3015552022 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Takayuki Yoshino, G. Pentheroudakis, Saori Mishima, Michael J. Overman, Kun‐Huei Yeh, Eishi Baba, Yoichi Naito, Felipe A. Calvo, Ajit Kumar Saxena, L.-T. Chen, Masayuki Takeda, Andrés Cervantes, Hiroya Taniguchi, Kazuhiro Yoshida, Yasuhiro Kodera, Yuko Kitagawa, Josep Tabernero, Howard A. Burris, J.-Y. Douillard

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJanssen Research and DevelopmentShionogiSanofi K.K.PharmacyclicsSierra OncologyEli Lilly JapanAbbott JapanNovartis PharmaAstraZenecaGenentechCelgeneYakult HonshaOtsuka PharmaceuticalDaiichi Sankyo EuropeEuropean Society for Medical OncologyPfizer JapanMeiji Seika PharmaDaiichi-SankyoSeagenRevolution MedicinesJapan Society of Clinical OncologyJiangsu Hengrui MedicineBeiGeneAstellas PharmaEisaiFibroGenJapan Blood Products OrganizationEli Lilly and CompanyEA Pharma Co., Ltd.Les Laboratories Pierre FabreIpsenArray BioPharmaMSD K.K.F. Hoffmann-La RocheBoehringer Ingelheim JapanHalozymeServierGilead SciencesGlaxoSmithKlineFoundation MedicineKowa CompanySanofiMedtronic JapanAmgenChugai PharmaceuticalSymphogenPfizerBiogen
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabMicrosatellite instabilityOncologyClinical trialCompanion diagnosticInternal medicineClinical OncologyCancerTrk receptorImmunotherapyReceptorNeurotrophinGeneMicrosatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations139
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207