MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281960949 · doi:10.1158/2643-3230.bcd-21-0205

Perspectives on the Risk-Stratified Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

2022· article· en· W4281960949 on OpenAlexaff
Faith E. Davies, Charlotte Pawlyn, Saad Z. Usmani, Jesús F. San Miguel, Hermann Einsele, Eileen M. Boyle, Jill Corre, Daniel Auclair, Hearn Jay Cho, Sagar Lonial, Pieter Sonneveld, A. Keith Stewart, P. Leif Bergsagel, Martin Kaiser, Katja Weisel, Jonathan J. Keats, Joseph Mıkhael, Kathryn E. Morgan, Irene M. Ghobrial, Robert Z. Orlowski, Ola Landgren, Francesca Gay, Joseph Caers, Wee Joo Chng, Ajai Chari, Brian A. Walker, Shaji Kumar, Luciano J. Costa, Kenneth C. Anderson, Gareth J. Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Cancer Discovery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersCancer Research UK
KeywordsMultiple myelomaRisk stratificationStratification (seeds)MedicineOncologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multiple myeloma treatment landscape has changed dramatically. This change, paralleled by an increase in scientific knowledge, has resulted in significant improvement in survival. However, heterogeneity remains in clinical outcomes, with a proportion of patients not benefiting from current approaches and continuing to have a poor prognosis. A significant proportion of the variability in outcome can be predicted on the basis of clinical and biochemical parameters and tumor-acquired genetic variants, allowing for risk stratification and a more personalized approach to therapy. This article discusses the principles that can enable the rational and effective development of therapeutic approaches for high-risk multiple myeloma.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood Cancer DiscoverySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207