MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3188798727 · doi:10.1200/jco.21.00018

Utility of a Cancer Predisposition Screening Tool for Predicting Subsequent Malignant Neoplasms in Childhood Cancer Survivors

2021· article· en· W3188798727 on OpenAlexaffabout
Noelle Cullinan, Ian Schiller, Giancarlo Di Giuseppe, Mohammed Rafiqul Islam Mamun, Lara Reichman, Chantel Cacciotti, Laura Wheaton, Kimberly Caswell, Bruna Di Monte, Paul Gibson, Donna L. Johnston, Adam Fleming, Jason D. Pole, David Malkin, William D. Foulkes, Nandini Dendukuri, Catherine Goudie, Paul C. Nathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioMcMaster Children's HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreHamilton Health SciencesMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenPediatric Oncology GroupMcGill University Health CentreKingston Health Sciences CentrePublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerOncologyMalignancyHazard ratioCancer registryInternal medicineGenetic predispositionConfidence intervalDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) are at risk of developing subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs) resulting from exposure to prior therapies. CCS with underlying cancer predisposition syndromes are at additional genetic risk of SMN development. The McGill Interactive Pediatric OncoGenetic Guidelines (MIPOGG) tool identifies children with cancer at increased likelihood of having a cancer predisposition syndrome, guiding clinicians through a series of Yes or No questions that generate a recommendation for or against genetic evaluation. We evaluated MIPOGG's ability to predict SMN development in CCS. METHODS: Using the provincial cancer registry (Ontario, Canada), and adopting a nested case-control approach, we identified CCS diagnosed and/or treated for a primary malignancy before age 18 years (1986-2015). CCS who developed an SMN (cases) were matched, by primary cancer and year of diagnosis, with CCS who did not develop an SMN (controls) over the same period (1:5 ratio). Potential predictors for SMN development (chemotherapy, radiation, and MIPOGG output) were applied retrospectively using clinical data pertaining to the first malignancy. Conditional logistic regression models estimated hazard ratios and 95% CIs associated with each covariate, alone and in combination, for SMN development. RESULTS: Of 13,367 children with a primary cancer, 317 (2.4%) developed an SMN and were matched to 1,569 controls. A MIPOGG output recommending evaluation was significantly associated with SMN development (hazard ratio 1.53; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.19) in a multivariable model that included primary cancer therapy exposures. MIPOGG was predictive of SMN development, showing value in nonhematologic malignancies and in CCS not exposed to radiation. CONCLUSION: MIPOGG has additional value for SMN prediction beyond treatment exposures and may be beneficial in decision making for enhanced individualized SMN surveillance strategies for CCS.

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)0.013
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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→