MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 2407: Stage shifting by modifying the determinants of cancer

2019· article· en· W4249683237 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gyanendra Pokharel, Paula J. Robson, Lorraine Shack, John J. Spinelli, Karen Kopciuk

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)Computer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early detection of cancer is a major challenge because most tumors are asymptomatic in the early stages. However, if the cancer is caught early, it can be treated more effectively thereby improving survival rates. Many environmental, lifestyle and genetic risk factors for developing cancer have been identified; however, they collectively do not fully explain its etiology. By using health and lifestyle information of people along with their cancer screening history before they develop cancer, we hope to identify factors that can be modified to avoid diagnosis at later stages of disease. These identified factors will be evaluated immediately using simulated data that mimics real data without waiting years for results from intervention studies. Hence, the aim of our study is to explore patient and health care system factors associated with stage of cancer diagnosis and to explore reduction in stages at diagnosis by modifying identified factors using simulation methods. The study is based on results obtained from the analysis of the data collected from the participants in Alberta Tomorrow Project (ATP), a prospective cohort of over 50,000 adults (aged ≥35 years). More than 3,500 participants have been diagnosed with cancer since their enrollment in the ATP. Close to 80% of the breast and colorectal cancers, and 70% of the lung cancer were diagnosed at early stage (stages I and II) and late stage (stages III and IV), respectively. Using these information as prior knowledge, we simulated the stages of breast, lung, and colorectal cancers at diagnosis along with risk factors and screening interventions. The outcome (stage at diagnosis) was modeled on the ordinal scale (I-IV) using a popular ordinal logistic regression model, so-called proportional odds and partial proportional odds models, that assesses the strengths of the associations between ordinal outcomes and measured risk factors. Preliminary findings from our simulation study for either ordinal response model found that a change in combination of risk factors could increase the probability of shifting the stage of diagnosis. We also plan to explore a shift towards earlier stage at diagnosis by modifying selected environmental and lifestyle risk factors - for example, reducing the amount of time spent in the midday sun (reduced risk exposure), and increase the amount of vitamin D (increase protective factor exposure). This will be done systematically to identify the impact of factors individually and collectively. The comprehensive modeling of factors associated with cancer stage at diagnosis provides information simply not attainable in empirical studies. Using a simple framework of stage at diagnosis, we expect to identify factors that can be used by screening and prevention programs to identify individuals who may benefit from individualized screening practices or from targeted prevention messages, thereby increasing the proportion of cases diagnosed at earlier stages.Citation Format: Gyanendra Pokharel, Paula J. Robson, Lorraine Shack, John J. Spinelli, Karen A. Kopciuk. Stage shifting by modifying the determinants of cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2407.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologySame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207