MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307496993 · doi:10.1111/ajco.13886

Early phase oncology clinical trials in Malaysia: current status and future perspectives

2022· review· en· W4307496993 on OpenAlexaff
Pei Jye Voon, Wei‐Hong Lai, Ros Suzanna Bustaman, Lillian L. Siu, Albiruni Ryan Abdul Razak, Akhmal Yusof, Noor Hisham Abdullah

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialDrug developmentFacilitatorGovernment (linguistics)EnablingClinical OncologyMedicineOncologyPolitical scienceBusinessEconomic growthInternal medicinePharmacologyDrugCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, the majority of oncology clinical trials are conducted in Western Europe and North America. Globalization of drug development has resulted in sponsors shifting their focus to the Asia-Pacific region. In Malaysia, implementation of various government policies to promote clinical trials has been initiated over a decade ago and includes the establishment of Clinical Research Malaysia, which functions as a facilitator and enabler of industry-sponsored clinical trials on a nationwide basis. Although oncology clinical trials in Malaysia have seen promising growth, there are still only a limited number of early phase oncology studies being conducted. Hence, the Phase 1 Realization Project was initiated to develop Malaysia's early phase clinical trial capabilities. In addition, the adaptation of good practices from other countries contribute to the effective implementation of existing initiatives to drive progress in the development of early phase drug development set up in Malaysia. Furthermore, holistic approaches with emphasis in training and education, infrastructure capacities, strategic alliances, reinforcement of upstream activities in the value chain of drug development, enhanced patient advocacy, coupled with continued commitment from policy makers are imperative in nurturing a resilient clinical research ecosystem in Malaysia.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.344 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia-Pacific Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207