MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320932490 · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2022.7096

Molecular Profiling of Endometrial Cancer From TCGA to Clinical Practice

2023· review· en· W4320932490 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProfiling (computer programming)Endometrial cancerCategorizationClinical trialAdjuvantDiseaseOncologyBioinformaticsComputational biologyInternal medicineCancerComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular classification provides an objective, reproducible framework for categorization of endometrial cancers (ECs), informing prognosis and selection of therapy. Currently, the uptake of molecular classification, integration in to EC management algorithms, and enrollment in molecular subtype-specific clinical trials lags behind what it could be. Access to molecular testing is not uniform, and subsequent management (surgical, adjuvant therapy) is unacceptably variable. We are in the midst of a critical landscape change in this disease site, with increasing emphasis on the integration of molecular features in EC care that can potentially improve standard of care globally. This article summarizes the rationale for molecular classification of ECs, strategies for implementation in low and high resource settings, and actionable opportunities based on this information.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.253 · 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