MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214511738 · doi:10.1097/coc.0000000000000900

Use of “Repurposed” Drugs in the Treatment of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

2022· article· en· W4214511738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialOvarian cancerObservational studyEpithelial ovarian cancerRandomized controlled trialNonsteroidalMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epithelial ovarian cancer has poor outcomes with standard therapy and limited options for treatment of recurrent disease. This systematic review summarizes the data on the clinical use of repurposed drugs. We searched for clinical studies using "repurposed" agents for the treatment of ovarian cancer in the following databases: PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov, Clinical Trial Registry of India, European Clinical Trials Registry, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. We excluded reviews, preclinical studies, and non-English language studies. We assessed the quality of included studies. The following agents/class of agents were included: statins, hydroxychloroquine, metformin, itraconazole, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, vitamin D, proton pump inhibitors, beta-blockers, and sodium valproate. Only one randomized controlled trial investigated metformin, which found no benefit of metformin. However, this had a high risk of bias (no details of randomization). Among the observational studies, 70% were of high quality (Newcastle-Ottawa scale ≥7). Clinical benefit was seen for itraconazole, beta-blockers, metformin, statins, and proton pump inhibitors. Though multiple studies aim to repurpose agents in epithelial ovarian cancer, the most published literature is observational, and none are practice-changing. Given the solid preclinical data regarding the anticancer efficacy of these agents, well-designed clinical trials are urgently required.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207