MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120649838 · doi:10.3390/curroncol28010029

Evaluation and Management of Dyslipidemia in Patients Treated with Lorlatinib

2021· article· en· W3120649838 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Normand Blais, Jean‐Philippe Adam, John Nguyen, Jean‐Claude Grégoire

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDyslipidemiaHypertriglyceridemiaGuidelineInternal medicinePopulationClinical trialIntensive care medicineCancerCholesterolPhysical therapyDiseaseTriglyceridePathologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of lorlatinib, an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor for the treatment of ALK-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, is associated with dyslipidemia in over 80% of patients. Clinical trial protocols for the management of lorlatinib-associated dyslipidemia differ from clinical practice guidelines for the management of dyslipidemia to prevent cardiovascular disease, in that they are based on total cholesterol and triglyceride levels rather than on the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels that form the basis of current cardiovascular guideline recommendations. In order to simplify and harmonize the management of cardiovascular risk in patients with lorlatinib, an advisory committee consisting of a medical oncologist, a cardiologist, and two pharmacists with expertise in cardiology and oncology aimed to develop a simplified algorithm, adapted from the Canadian Cardiovascular Society dyslipidemia recommendations. Recommendations for the evaluation and management of hypercholesterolemia and isolated hypertriglyceridemia in patients treated with lorlatinib are outlined. These recommendations are based on data collected in a large number of lipid-lowering therapy trials applicable to individuals with and without cancer. Considering the relatively long life expectancy and improving prognosis of patients with ALK translocations, this specific patient population should be treated as are patients without cancer and are likely to derive the same benefits from lipid-lowering 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207