MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313379654 · doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2022.12.004

CANTRK

2022· article· en· W4313379654 on OpenAlexafffund
Tracy Stockley, Bernard Lo, Adrian Box, Andrea Corredor, John F. DeCoteau, Patrice Desmeules, Harriet Feilotter, Daria Grafodatskaya, Wenda Greer, Cynthia Hawkins, Weei-Yuarn Huang, Iyare Izevbaye, Guylaine Lépine, Sebastião N. Martins Filho, Andreas I. Papadakis, Paul C. Park, Jean‐Baptiste Rivière, Brandon S. Sheffield, Alan Spatz, Elizabeth Spriggs, Danh Tran‐Thanh, Stephen Yip, Tong Zhang, Emina Torlakovic, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Diagnostics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British ColumbiaWilliam Osler Health SystemCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalManitoba HealthHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of AlbertaJewish General HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenNova Scotia Health AuthorityMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesOttawa HospitalCalgary Laboratory ServicesHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecUniversity of SaskatchewanPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersBayer Canada
KeywordsComputational biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian NTRK (CANTRK) study is an interlaboratory comparison ring study to optimize testing for neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusions in Canadian laboratories. Sixteen diagnostic laboratories used next-generation sequencing (NGS) for NTRK1, NTRK2, or NTRK3 fusions. Each laboratory received 12 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples with unique NTRK fusions and two control non-NTRK fusion samples (one ALK and one ROS1). Laboratories used validated protocols for NGS fusion detection. Panels included Oncomine Comprehensive Assay v3, Oncomine Focus Assay, Oncomine Precision Assay, AmpliSeq for Illumina Focus, TruSight RNA Pan-Cancer Panel, FusionPlex Lung, and QIAseq Multimodal Lung. One sample was withdrawn from analysis because of sample quality issues. Of the remaining 13 samples, 6 of 11 NTRK fusions and both control fusions were detected by all laboratories. Two fusions, WNK2::NTRK2 and STRN3::NTRK2, were not detected by 10 laboratories using the Oncomine Comprehensive or Focus panels, due to absence of WNK2 and STRN3 in panel designs. Two fusions, TPM3::NTRK1 and LMNA::NTRK1, were challenging to detect on the AmpliSeq for Illumina Focus panel because of bioinformatics issues. One ETV6::NTRK3 fusion at low levels was not detected by two laboratories using the TruSight Pan-Cancer Panel. Panels detecting all fusions included FusionPlex Lung, Oncomine Precision, and QIAseq Multimodal Lung. The CANTRK study showed competency in detection of NTRK fusions by NGS across different panels in 16 Canadian laboratories and identified key test issues as targets for improvements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8120.756

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular DiagnosticsSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207