MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281963646 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.7954

Recommendations for the implementation of genetic testing for metastatic prostate cancer patients in Canada

2022· article· en· W4281963646 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Shamini Selvarajah, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Michael Kolinsky, Ricardo Rendon, Soufiane El Hallani, Neil Fleshner, Sebastién J. Hotte, Justin Lorentz, Karen Panabaker, Renée Perrier, Frédéric Pouliot, Alan Spatz, Stephen Yip, Kim Chi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité LavalAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreLondon Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversity of AlbertaBC Cancer AgencyDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMerck CanadaAstellas PharmaIncyteIpsenCanadian Urological AssociationAstraZeneca CanadaEisaiMacroGenicsDaiichi Sankyo EuropeJanssen CanadaSanofiAmgenPfizerAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsGenetic testingGeneticistGenetic counselingMedicineMultidisciplinary approachProstate cancerCancerFamily medicineBioinformaticsInternal medicineGeneticsBiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Genetic testing in advanced prostate cancer is rapidly moving to become standard of care. Testing for genetic alterations in genes involved in DNA repair pathways, particularly those implicated in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, in patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) can inform selection of optimal therapies, as well as provide information about familial cancer risks; however, there are currently no consistent Canadian guidelines in place for genetic testing in mPCa. METHODS: A multidisciplinary steering committee guided the process of an environmental scan to define the current landscape, as well as the perceived challenges, through interviews with specialists from 14 sites across Canada. The challenges most commonly identified include limited testing guidelines and protocols, inadequate education and awareness, and insufficient resources. Following the environmental scan, an expert multidisciplinary working group with pan-Canadian representation from medical oncologists, urologists, medical geneticists, genetic counsellors, pathologists, and clinical laboratory scientists convened in virtual meetings to discuss the challenges in implementation of genetic testing in mPCa across Canada. RESULTS: Key recommendations from the working group include implementation of germline and tumor HRR testing for all patients with mPCa, with a mainstreaming model in which non-geneticist clinicians can initiate germline testing. The working group defined the roles and responsibilities of the various healthcare providers (HCPs) involved in the genetic testing pathway for mPCa patients. In addition, the educational needs for all HCPs involved in the genetic testing pathway for mPCa were defined. CONCLUSIONS: As genetic testing for mPCa becomes standard of care, additional resources and investments will be required to implement the changes that will be needed to support the necessary volume of genetic testing, to ensure equitable access, and to provide education to all stakeholders.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0070.006
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207