MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281845612 · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.05.522

Whole-genome and transcriptome analysis enhances precision cancer treatment options

2022· article· en· W4281845612 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin Pleasance, Alexandra Böhm, Laura M. Williamson, Jessica Nelson, Yaoqing Shen, Melika Bonakdar, Emma Titmuss, Veronika Csizmók, Kathleen Wee, Sina Hosseinzadeh, Cameron J. Grisdale, Caralyn Reisle, J. Paul Taylor, Eleanor Lewis, Martin Jones, Dustin W. Bleile, Sara Sadeghi, Wen’E Zhang, Anna Davies, Benedetta Pellegrini, Tina Wong, Reanne Bowlby, Simon K. Chan, Karen Mungall, Edward Chuah, Andrew J. Mungall, Richard A. Moore, Yongjun Zhao, Balvir Deol, Ana Fisic, Alexandra Fok, Dean A. Regier, Deirdre Weymann, David F. Schaeffer, Sean Young, Stephen Yip, Kasmintan A. Schrader, N. Levasseur, Sara Taylor, Xiaolan Feng, Anna V. Tinker, K. Savage, Stephen Chia, Karen A. Gelmon, Sophie Sun, Howard J. Lim, Daniel J. Renouf, Steven J.M. Jones, Marco A. Marra, Janessa Laskin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlSimon Fraser UniversityKelowna General HospitalPancreas Centre (Canada)University of British ColumbiaCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre
FundersCanada Research ChairsGenome British ColumbiaCanada Foundation for InnovationNational Institutes of HealthBC Cancer FoundationGenome Canada
KeywordsMedicinePrecision medicineTranscriptomePersonalized medicineClinical trialGenomeComputational biologyBioinformaticsGeneOncologyInternal medicineGene expressionGeneticsBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent advances are enabling delivery of precision genomic medicine to cancer clinics. While the majority of approaches profile panels of selected genes or hotspot regions, comprehensive data provided by whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing and analysis (WGTA) present an opportunity to align a much larger proportion of patients to therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Samples from 570 patients with advanced or metastatic cancer of diverse types enrolled in the Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) program underwent WGTA. DNA-based data, including mutations, copy number and mutation signatures, were combined with RNA-based data, including gene expression and fusions, to generate comprehensive WGTA profiles. A multidisciplinary molecular tumour board used WGTA profiles to identify and prioritize clinically actionable alterations and inform therapy. Patient responses to WGTA-informed therapies were collected. RESULTS: Clinically actionable targets were identified for 83% of patients, of which 37% of patients received WGTA-informed treatments. RNA expression data were particularly informative, contributing to 67% of WGTA-informed treatments; 25% of treatments were informed by RNA expression alone. Of a total 248 WGTA-informed treatments, 46% resulted in clinical benefit. RNA expression data were comparable to DNA-based mutation and copy number data in aligning to clinically beneficial treatments. Genome signatures also guided therapeutics including platinum, poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and immunotherapies. Patients accessed WGTA-informed treatments through clinical trials (19%), off-label use (35%) and as standard therapies (46%) including those which would not otherwise have been the next choice of therapy, demonstrating the utility of genomic information to direct use of chemotherapies as well as targeted therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating RNA expression and genome data illuminated treatment options that resulted in 46% of treated patients experiencing positive clinical benefit, supporting the use of comprehensive WGTA profiling in clinical cancer care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations120
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207