MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024577926 · doi:10.1200/po.19.00335

Multicenter Validation Study to Implement Plasma Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor T790M Testing in Clinical Laboratories

2020· article· en· W3024577926 on OpenAlexaffabout
Natasha B. Leighl, Suzanne Kamel‐Reid, Parneet Cheema, Janessa Laskin, Aly Karsan, Tong Zhang, Tracy Stockley, T. Barnes, R. Tudor, Geoffrey Liu, Scott Owen, J. Rothenstein, Ronald L. Burkes, Mussawar Iqbal, Alan Spatz, Léon C.L.T. van Kempen, Iyare Izevbaye, David Laurence, Lisa W. Le, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Precision Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMount Sinai HospitalMcGill University Health CentreLakeridge HealthPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsT790MOsimertinibConcordanceMedicineEpidermal growth factor receptorLiquid biopsyInternal medicineBiopsyOncologyCancerGefitinib

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: T790M mutations is an emerging alternative to tumor rebiopsy in acquired epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance. Validation of analytical sensitivity and clinical utility is required before routine diagnostic use in clinical laboratories. PATIENTS AND METHODS: -mutant lung cancer at 7 Canadian centers, who were being screened for the ASTRIS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02474355), participated in this companion study. Plasma T790M mutation was detected using droplet digital polymerase chain reaction, Cobas (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN), or next-generation sequencing in 4 laboratories. T790M concordance was assessed between plasma and tumor samples. RESULTS: Assessment of T790M in tumor biopsy tissue was successful in 81% of patients; 49% had confirmed T790M results (tumor or plasma) for ASTRIS. Plasma testing in this companion study yielded T790M results in 97% of patients; 62% had T790M-positive results, 36% had negative results, and 2% had indeterminate results. Of 38 patients with negative or indeterminate biopsy results, 55% had positive plasma T790M results, increasing the proportion with T790M-positive results to 73%. Sensitivity of plasma T790M testing was 75%. Overall concordance between tissue and plasma was 64%, and concordance among laboratories was 90.3%. Response to osimertinib and duration of therapy were similar irrespective of testing method (overall response rate, 62.5% for tissue, 66.7% for plasma, and 70.6% for both). CONCLUSION: T790M testing can identify significantly more patients than biopsy alone who may benefit from targeted therapy.

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)0.080
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0800.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Precision OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207