MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322762336 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2640782/v1

A systematic review of CSF biomarker discovery in neuro-oncology: A roadmap to standardization and clinical application

2023· review· en· W4322762336 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Mikolajewicz, Patricia Yee, Debarati Bhanja, Mara Trifoi, Thomas Kislinger, Alireza Mansouri

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationBiomarkerBiomarker discoveryMedicinePrecision oncologyMedical physicsOncologyInternal medicineComputer scienceCancerBiologyProteomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective diagnosis, prognostication and management of central nervous system (CNS) malignancies traditionally involves invasive brain biopsy but sampling and molecular profiling of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a safer, rapid and non-invasive alternative that can offer a snapshot of the intracranial milieu. While numerous assays and biomarkers have been analyzed, translational challenges remain, and standardization of protocols is necessary. Here we systematically reviewed 141 studies (Medline, SCOPUS, and Biosis databases; published between January 2000 and September 29th, 2022) that molecularly profiled CSF from adults with brain malignancies including glioma, brain metastasis (BrM), and CNS lymphoma (CNSL). We provide an overview of promising CSF biomarkers, propose CSF reporting guidelines, and discuss the various considerations that go into biomarker discovery, including the influence of blood-brain barrier disruption, type of biomarker (i.e., tumor cell DNA, RNA, protein), cell-of-origin, and site of CSF acquisition (e.g., lumbar, ventricular). We also performed a meta-analysis of proteomic datasets, identifying biomarkers in CNS malignancies and establishing a resource for the research community.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0200.023
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→