MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular testing and patterns of treatment in patients with NSCLC: An IASLC analysis of ASCO CancerLinQ Discovery Data.

2022· article· en· W4281825562 on OpenAlexaff
Madhusmita Behera, Gregory J. Joseph, Manali Rupji, Zhonglu Huang, Becky Bunn, Murry W. Wynes, Jeffrey M. Switchenko, Giorgio V. Scagliotti, Kristin Higgins, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Chandra P. Belani, Lecia V. Sequist, Suresh S. Ramalingam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersInternational Association for the Study of Lung Cancer
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLung cancerOncologyAdenocarcinomaStage (stratigraphy)Univariate analysisLogistic regressionCancerMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9128 Background: Precision medicine has resulted in improved outcomes for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); while molecular testing is considered critical for guiding treatment decisions for advanced stage NSCLC, adoption of testing in routine practice is variable. We analyzed the factors contributing to molecular testing and treatment patterns in patients with lung cancer. Methods: The ASCO CancerLinQ Discovery dataset was queried to identify patients diagnosed with lung cancer between the years 2010-2018. Data on demographics, tumor stage, histology and treatments were extracted, and receipt of molecular testing was investigated as the primary outcome. Univariate association of each clinicopathological variable with molecular testing outcome was performed using chi-square test for categorical variables and ANOVA test for numerical variables. A multivariable logistic regression analysis with backward selection at an alpha of 0.05 was reported. All analyses were conducted using SAS 9.4. Results: A total of 37,925 NSCLC patients with stage IV disease were analyzed. Patient characteristics: median age 65 years, 51% male, 68% white, 33.5% adenocarcinoma. Approximately 22% of all NSCLC patients had molecular testing results. In adenocarcinoma patients, 49% had molecular testing results available. In the stage IV group, 47% were treated with chemotherapy, 16% with immunotherapy and 3% with targeted therapy. On multivariable analysis, females were more likely to have molecular testing compared to males [(OR: 1.29 (1.22-1.37); p < 0.001]. Compared to White patients, Black patients were less likely to have molecular testing [OR: 0.89 (0.81-0.97); p = 0.009] and Asians were more likely to undergo testing [OR: 2.22 (1.79-2.75); p < 0.001]. Hispanic patients were more likely to undergo molecular testing compared to non-Hispanics [OR:1.24 (1.02-1.52); p = 0.03]. Additionally, treatment with immunotherapy [OR: 1.86 (1.72-2.01); p < 0.001] and targeted therapy [OR: 2.29 (2.00-2.64); p < 0.001] were associated with significantly higher likelihood of having molecular testing. These results were also confirmed on a subgroup analysis of adenocarcinoma patients. Conclusions: In this analysis of a US-based real-world dataset of stage IV NSCLC patients, White race and female sex are associated with higher likelihood of having molecular test performed. The percentage of patients undergoing testing remains sub-optimal.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207