MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094287902 · doi:10.17294/2330-0698.1794

Cole Relaxation Frequency as a Prognostic Parameter for Breast Cancer

2020· article· en· W3094287902 on OpenAlexfundno aff
W. D. Gregory, Shahila Mehboob Christie, John Shell, Georges J. Nahhas, Maharaj Singh, Wendy M. Mikkelson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteSmall Business Innovation ResearchAurora Research InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerMultivariate analysisRelaxation (psychology)MetastasisMedicineMultivariate statisticsCancerProspective cohort studyOncologyInternal medicineRadiologyGynecologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously reported successful classification of breast cancer versus benign tissue using the Cole relaxation frequency measured on tissue excised during breast surgery as part of a study at two urban hospitals in the U.S. Midwest. Using that health system's cancer registry, we have discovered retrospectively that outcomes for patients who participated in the initial study can be classified correctly in 3 well-differentiated categories: nonrecurrent (NR); recurrent with no metastasis (RNM); and recurrent with metastasis (RM). As Cole relaxation frequency increases, the classification moves from NR to RNM and finally to RM. Multivariate analysis showed a significant association of "time-cancer-free" for all patients in these recurrent categories, with P-values ranging between 0.0001 to 0.0047. Thus, this follow-up report shows the potential feasibility of using Cole relaxation frequency as a prognostic parameter in a larger prospective study.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of patient-centered research and reviewsSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207