MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093890556 · doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2020.10.008

Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients after prior immunotherapy: The multicenter retrospective CLARITY study

2020· article· en· W3093890556 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Melissa Bersanelli, Sebastiano Buti, Diana Giannarelli, Alessandro Leonetti, Alessio Cortellini, Giuseppe Lo Russo, Diego Signorelli, Luca Toschi, Michèle Milella, Sara Pilotto, Emilio Bria, Claudia Proto, Arianna Marinello, Giovanni Randon, Sabrina Rossi, Emanuele Vita, Giulia Sartori, Ettore D’Argento, Eva Qako, Elisa Giaiacopi, Laura Ghilardi, Anna Bettini, Elena Rapacchi, Francesca Mazzoni, Daniele Lavacchi, Vieri Scotti, Lucia Pia Ciccone, Michele De Tursi, Pietro Di Marino, Daniele Santini, Marco Russano, Paola Bordi, Massimo Di Maïo, Marco Audisio, Marco Filetti, Raffaele Giusti, Rossana Berardi, Ilaria Fiordoliva, Giulio Cerea, Elio Gregory Pizzutilo, Alessandra Bearz, Elisa De Carlo, Fabiana Letizia Cecere, Davide Renna, Roberta Camisa, Giuseppe Caruso, Corrado Ficorella, Giuseppe Luigi Banna, Diego Cortinovis, Matteo Brighenti, Marina Chiara Garassino, Marcello Tiseo

Bibliographic record

VenueLung Cancer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJanssen BiotechAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroMedImmuneMerck Sharp and DohmeBristol-Myers Squibb CanadaEisaiSeattle GeneticsMerck KGaADaiichi Sankyo EuropeSanofiNovartisIpsenBritish Mycological SocietyDaiichi-SankyoUnited Therapeutics CorporationMSD Life Science Foundation, Public Interest Incorporated FoundationBayerCelgeneAstraZenecaRocheAstellas Pharma USPfizerBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOncologyLung cancerClinical endpointChemotherapyImmunotherapyRetrospective cohort studyConfidence intervalGemcitabineHazard ratioCancerClinical trial

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueLung CancerSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207