OS12.7.A IMPLEMENTATION OF A NATIONAL AYA MOLECULAR TUMOR BOARD: REPORT FROM THE CANADIAN AYA NEURO-ONCOLOGY NETWORK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND The adolescent and young adult (AYA) population (15-39 years) is a unique and understudied population within neuro-oncology, and their care requires expertise across pediatric and adult-type brain tumors. Current challenges in AYA neuro-oncology include fragmented care across pediatric and adult hospitals, low inclusion in clinical trials, unique survivorship considerations and a lack of standard-of-care therapies for this population. MATERIAL AND METHODS We report on a two-year national effort from the Canadian AYA Neuro-Oncology Network (CANON) to implement national AYA rounds. The aims of the rounds are to discuss challenging cases, encourage and review the utility standardized molecular testing, and provide point-of-care multidisciplinary recommendations benefiting from the expertise of pediatric and adult providers across several tertiary and community centers. RESULTS Since April 2021, the Canadian national AYA rounds have occurred biweekly on a virtual secure platform. Over 2 years, 138 cases have been discussed; 23% of patients were 15-20 years old, 33% were 21-30 years old and 26% were 31-40 years old. Cases discussed included low grade gliomas (39%), followed by high grade gliomas (33%), ependymomas (6.5%), medulloblastomas (6.5%) and others (9.4%). A total of 240 participants across 25 institutions across Canada have attended the rounds, spanning adult and pediatric neurosurgery, neuro-pathology, neuro-oncology, radiation oncology and radiology. A prospective database of cases presented at our AYA rounds, matching molecular characterization, choice of therapies and relevant clinical outcomes has been initiated and interim data will be presented at the meeting. CONCLUSION Virtual national AYA-neuro-oncology multi-disciplinary rounds have raised awareness of current gaps and possible nation-wide solutions to improve the care of AYA brain tumors. Leveraging this network, our group has published guidelines for molecular testing in AYA brain tumors and is employing this platform for ongoing research and clinical collaborations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".