MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362471113 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30040302

Consensus Recommendations to Optimize the Detection and Reporting of NTRK Gene Fusions by RNA-Based Next-Generation Sequencing

2023· review· en· W4362471113 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Tracy Stockley, Bernard Lo, Adrian Box, Andrea Corredor, John F. DeCoteau, Patrice Desmeules, Harriet Feilotter, Daria Grafodatskaya, Cynthia Hawkins, Weei-Yuarn Huang, Iyare Izevbaye, Guylaine Lépine, Andreas I. Papadakis, Paul C. Park, Brandon S. Sheffield, Danh Tran‐Thanh, Stephen Yip, Ming‐Sound Tsao

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWilliam Osler Health SystemCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalManitoba HealthHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversity of AlbertaNova Scotia Health AuthorityJewish General HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of SaskatchewanPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of Toronto
FundersBayer Canada
KeywordsFusion geneMedicineRNAComputational biologyDNA sequencingGeneGene nomenclatureBioinformaticsGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The detection of gene fusions by RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) is an emerging method in clinical genetic laboratories for oncology biomarker testing to direct targeted therapy selections. A recent Canadian study (CANTRK study) comparing the detection of NTRK gene fusions on different NGS assays to determine subjects’ eligibility for tyrosine kinase TRK inhibitor therapy identified the need for recommendations for best practices for laboratory testing to optimize RNA-based NGS gene fusion detection. To develop consensus recommendations, representatives from 17 Canadian genetic laboratories participated in working group discussions and the completion of survey questions about RNA-based NGS. Consensus recommendations are presented for pre-analytic, analytic and reporting aspects of gene fusion detection by RNA-based NGS.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.011

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 head0.364
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.080 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReporting
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207