MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213132440 · doi:10.1016/j.ctarc.2022.100534

Integrating comprehensive genomic sequencing of non-small cell lung cancer into a public healthcare system

2022· article· en· W4213132440 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kirstin Perdrizet, Tracy Stockley, Jennifer Law, Adam C. Smith, Tong Zhang, Roxanne Fernandes, Muqdas Shabir, Peter Sabatini, Nadia Al Youssef, Christine Ishu, Janice J.N. Li, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Prodipto Pal, Michael Cabanero, Joerg Schwock, Hyang Mi Ko, Scott Boerner, Heather Ruff, Frances A. Shepherd, Penelope A. Bradbury, Geoffrey Liu, Adrian G. Sacher, Natasha B. Leighl

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Treatment and Research Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsWilliam Osler Health SystemPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKRASMedicineReimbursementClinical trialLung cancerOncologyInternal medicineTargeted therapyCancerBioinformaticsHealth careBiologyColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Standard molecular testing for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the Canadian publicly funded health system includes single gene testing for EGFR, ALK, and ROS-1. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) may broaden treatment options for patients. This study examined the impact of CGP in a publicly funded health system. METHODS: Consenting patients with stage IV NSCLC without known targetable alterations underwent CGP on diagnostic samples. Patients that had progressed on targeted therapy were also eligible. The CGP assay was a hybrid capture next generation sequencing (NGS) panel (Oncomine Comprehensive Assay Version 3, ThermoFisher). The number of actionable alterations, changes in treatment, clinical trial eligibility and costs as a result of CGP were evaluated and patient willingness-to-pay. RESULTS: Of 182 screened patients,134 (74%) had successful CGP testing. Twenty percent had received prior targeted therapy. Incremental actionable alterations were identified in 31% of patients. The most common novel targets identified were mutations in ERBB2 (exon 20 insertions), MET (exon 14 skipping) and KRAS (G12C). At data cut off (31/12/2020), 16% of patients had a change in treatment as a result of CGP. Additional clinical trial options were identified for 75% of patients. The incremental direct laboratory cost for CGP beyond public reimbursement for single gene tests was $747 CAD/case. CONCLUSION: CGP identifies additional actionable targets beyond single gene tests with a direct impact on patient treatment and increased clinical trial eligibility. These benefits highlight the value of CGP in patients with NSCLC in public health systems.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Treatment and Research CommunicationsSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207