MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319080009 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30020145

Real-World Molecular Biomarker Testing Patterns and Results for Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancers in the United States

2023· article· en· W4319080009 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rutika Mehta, Astra M. Liepa, Shen Zheng, Anindya Chatterjee

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineMicrosatellite instabilityBiomarkerOncologyInternal medicineObservational studyClinical trialBiomarker discoveryImmunotherapyCancerBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decision to treat advanced gastroesophageal cancers (GECs) with targeted therapy and immunotherapy is based on key biomarker expression (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), microsatellite instability (MSI), and/or mismatch repair (MMR)). Real-world data on testing, results, and treatment patterns are limited. This retrospective observational study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database of patients from the United States. The analysis included adult patients with advanced GECs who initiated systemic treatment between 2017 and 2020. Biomarker testing patterns, timing, assays, tissue collection site, results, and treatment sequences were assessed. Of 1142 eligible patients, adenocarcinoma was the most prevalent histology (83% of patients). Overall, 571 (50%) patients were tested for PD-L1, 582 (51%) were tested for MMR/MSI, and 857 (75%) were tested for HER2. Between 2017 and 2020, the PD-L1 testing rate increased from 39% to 58%, and the MMR/MSI testing rate increased from 41% to 58%; the median time from initial diagnosis to first test decreased for both biomarkers. Programmed cell death receptor-1 inhibitor use was observed among patients with positive PD-L1 or MMR-deficient/MSI-High results. These results supplement data reported in key clinical trials and may inform decision-making as treatment options for advanced GECs evolve.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207