MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380090043 · doi:10.3390/cancers15123119

UAS™—A Urine Preservative for Oncology Applications

2023· article· en· W4380090043 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephanie Jordaens, Amit Arora, Kyle W. MacDonald, Cameron Wood, Jhana O. Hendrickx, Karen Zwaenepoel, Christophe Deben, Wiebren Tjalma, Patrick Pauwels, Koen Beyers, Vanessa Vankerckhoven

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDNA Genotek
KeywordsUrinePreservativeUrinary systemMedicineUrologyLiquid biopsyProstate cancerCancerInternal medicineChemistryFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liquid biopsy is a revolutionary tool that is gaining momentum in the field of cancer research. As a body fluid, urine can be used in non-invasive diagnostics for various types of cancer. We investigated the performance of UAS™ as a preservative for urinary analytes. Firstly, the need for urine preservation was investigated using urine samples from healthy volunteers. Secondly, the performance of UAS™ was assessed for cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and host cell integrity during storage at room temperature (RT) and after freeze-thaw cycling. Finally, UAS™ was used in a clinical setting on samples from breast and prostate cancer patients. In the absence of a preservative, urinary cfDNA was degraded, and bacterial overgrowth occurred at RT. In urine samples stored in UAS™, no microbial growth was seen, and cfDNA and cellular integrity were maintained for up to 14 days at RT. After freeze-thaw cycling, the preservation of host cell integrity and cfDNA showed significant improvements when using UAS™ compared to unpreserved urine samples. Additionally, UAS™ was found to be compatible with several commercially available isolation methods.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207