MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288046493 · doi:10.1038/s41408-022-00706-5

Distribution of clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) is not associated with race in patients with plasma cell neoplasms

2022· letter· en· W4288046493 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-France Gagnon, Shulan Tian, Susan M. Geyer, Neeraj Sharma, Celine M. Vachon, Yael Kusne, P. Leif Bergsagel, Andrew K. Stewart, S. Vincent Rajkumar, Shaji Kumar, Sikander Ailawadhi, Linda B. Baughn

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Cancer Journal · 2022
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthPharmacyclicsAmgenU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsHaematopoiesisDistribution (mathematics)BiologyRace (biology)ImmunologyPlasma cellPlasma cell neoplasmHematologyInternal medicineCancer researchMedicineStem cellGeneticsPlasmacytomaAntibodyMultiple myeloma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have recently raised mounting interest regarding clonal hematopoiesis (CH) in the setting of plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs). CH has been shown to occur at an increased frequency among patients with multiple myeloma (MM) undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation and to adversely affect overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the absence of immunomodulatory drug maintenance [ 1 ]. While evidence regarding a role for CH in PCN disease biology is growing, research efforts have largely focused on patients who self-report as non-Hispanic White (NHW). Given the increased risk of MM among Black/AA individuals and the association between CHIP and MM progression, we sought to interrogate CH in a diverse cohort and compare the frequency of this condition in individuals who self-identify as Black/AA vs. NHW.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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