MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205248686 · doi:10.4103/glioma.glioma_18_21

Molecular and clinical correlates of medulloblastoma subgroups

2021· article· en· W4205248686 on OpenAlexaff
Hallie Coltin, Vijay Ramaswamy

Bibliographic record

VenueGlioma · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedulloblastomaClinical trialMedicineOncologyDiseaseBrain tumorOverall survivalCancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medulloblastoma is a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality in children, as a significant proportion of patients succumb to their disease and most survivors are left with life-long sequelae of therapy. Prior medulloblastoma classification systems relied heavily on histology and failed to account for tumor biology. The upcoming 2021 WHO classification of central nervous system tumors now firmly establishes that medulloblastoma actually comprises at least four distinct molecular entities, with considerable substructure within each group. For the first time, the study design of contemporary clinical trials has now recognized the molecular heterogeneity of medulloblastoma. The incorporation of routine molecular subgrouping into upcoming clinical trials has the potential to significantly improve survival and quality of life for children and adults diagnosed with medulloblastoma. This review was conducted to summarize these recent advances in the genomics of medulloblastoma and to summarize the timely results of molecularly-informed published clinical trials. Specifically, English language literature will be reviewed in addition to the results of SJMB03, ACNS0331, and ACNS0332.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGliomaSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207