MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacogenomics in Pediatric Oncology: Mitigating Adverse Drug Reactions While Preserving Efficacy

2020· article· en· W3088395574 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelbaset Elzagallaai, Bruce Carleton, Michael Rieder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacogenomicsMedicineAdverse effectPharmacogeneticsCancerIntensive care medicineDosingDrugOncologyPediatric cancerCancer treatmentClinical trialChemotherapyInternal medicinePharmacologyGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer is the leading cause of death in American children older than 1 year of age. Major developments in drugs such as thiopurines and optimization in clinical trial protocols for treating cancer in children have led to a remarkable improvement in survival, from approximately 30% in the 1960s to more than 80% today. Short-term and long-term adverse effects of chemotherapy still affect most survivors of childhood cancer. Pharmacogenetics plays a major role in predicting the safety of cancer chemotherapy and, in the future, its effectiveness. Treatment failure in childhood cancer-due to either serious adverse effects that limit therapy or the failure of conventional dosing to induce remission-warrants development of new strategies for treatment. Here, we summarize the current knowledge of the pharmacogenomics of cancer drug treatment in children and of statistically and clinically relevant drug-gene associations and the mechanistic understandings that underscore their therapeutic value in the treatment of childhood cancer.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.339 · 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
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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and ToxicologySame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207