MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206653036 · doi:10.3390/cancers14020288

Recent Advances in Device Engineering and Computational Analysis for Characterization of Cell-Released Cancer Biomarkers

2022· review· en· W4206653036 on OpenAlexafffund
Hesam Abouali, Seied Ali Hosseini, Emma Purcell, Sunitha Nagrath, Mahla Poudineh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLiquid biopsyCirculating tumor cellCancerCancer biomarkersComputational biologyCancer therapyCell-free fetal DNABiomarkerCancer cellExtracellular vesiclesMedicineBioinformaticsBiologyMetastasisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During cancer progression, tumors shed different biomarkers into the bloodstream, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), extracellular vesicles (EVs), circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA), and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). The analysis of these biomarkers in the blood, known as 'liquid biopsy' (LB), is a promising approach for early cancer detection and treatment monitoring, and more recently, as a means for cancer therapy. Previous reviews have discussed the role of CTCs and ctDNA in cancer progression; however, ctDNA and EVs are rapidly evolving with technological advancements and computational analysis and are the subject of enormous recent studies in cancer biomarkers. In this review, first, we introduce these cell-released cancer biomarkers and briefly discuss their clinical significance in cancer diagnosis and treatment monitoring. Second, we present conventional and novel approaches for the isolation, profiling, and characterization of these markers. We then investigate the mathematical and in silico models that are developed to investigate the function of ctDNA and EVs in cancer progression. We convey our views on what is needed to pave the way to translate the emerging technologies and models into the clinic and make the case that optimized next-generation techniques and models are needed to precisely evaluate the clinical relevance of these LB markers.

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)0.000
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207