MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3178674176 · doi:10.1101/2021.07.09.451849

A patient-driven clinicogenomic partnership through the Metastatic Prostate Cancer Project

2021· preprint· en· W3178674176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jett Crowdis, Sara Balch, Lauren Sterlin, Beena Thomas, Sabrina Y. Camp, Michael Dunphy, Elana Anastasio, Shahrayz Shah, Alyssa L. Damon, Rafael Ramos, Delia Sosa, Ilan K. Small, Brett N. Tomson, Colleen M. Nguyen, Mary McGillicuddy, Parker Chastain, Meng Xiao He, Alexander T. M. Cheung, Stephanie A. Wankowicz, Alok K. Tewari, Dewey Kim, Saud H. AlDubayan, Ayanah Dowdye, Benjamin Zola, Joel Nowak, Jan Manarite, Major Idola Henry Gunn, Bryce T. Olson, Eric S. Lander, Corrie Painter, Nikhil Wagle, Eliezer M. Van Allen

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBroad InstituteMovember FoundationNational Institutes of HealthNational Science FoundationProstate Cancer FoundationConquer Cancer FoundationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsGeneral partnershipProstate cancerMedicineContext (archaeology)Circulating tumor cellProfiling (computer programming)CancerOncologyInternal medicineMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Molecular profiling studies have enabled numerous discoveries for metastatic prostate cancer (MPC), but they have mostly occurred in academic medical institutions focused on select patient populations. We developed the Metastatic Prostate Cancer Project (MPCproject, mpcproject.org ), a patient-partnered initiative to empower MPC patients living anywhere in the U.S. and Canada to participate in molecular research and contribute directly to translational discovery. Here we present clinicogenomic results from our partnership with the first 706 MPCproject participants. We found that a patient-centered and remote research strategy enhanced engagement with patients in rural and medically underserved areas. Furthermore, patient-reported data achieved 90% consistency with abstracted health records for therapies and provided a mechanism for patient-partners to share information about their cancer experience not documented in medical records. Among the molecular profiling data from 333 patient-partners (n = 573 samples), whole exome sequencing of 63 tumor samples obtained from hospitals across the U.S. and Canada and 19 plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) samples from blood donated remotely recapitulated known findings in MPC and enabled longitudinal study of prostate cancer evolution. Inexpensive ultra-low coverage whole genome sequencing of 318 cfDNA samples from donated blood revealed clinically relevant genomic changes like AR amplification, even in the context of low tumor burden. Collectively, this study illustrates the power of a longitudinal partnership with patients to generate a more representative clinical and molecular understanding of MPC. Note To assist our patient-partners and the wider MPC community interpret the results of this study, we have included a glossary of terms in the Supplementary Materials.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→