MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387269182 · doi:10.1002/brx2.33

Understanding the heterogeneous immune repertoire of brain metastases for designing next‐gen therapeutics

2023· article· en· W4387269182 on OpenAlexafffund
Zongjie Wang, Kangfu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain‐X · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImmune systemTumor microenvironmentBrain tumorImmunotherapyInfiltration (HVAC)MedicineCirculating tumor cellNeuroscienceBiologyCancerPathologyMetastasisImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Approximately 20% of cancer patients experience brain metastases in the advanced stages as circulating tumor cells migrate to and colonize the brain microvasculature. Due to the challenges associated with biopsies, our understanding of the tumor microenvironment and heterogeneity in brain metastases remains limited, hindering the development of systemic approaches for detection and treatment. Emerging evidence suggests that specific brain metastases induce a substantial level of immune activation and infiltration, which provides an opportunity to design specific immunotherapies targeting brain metastases. This perspective aims to summarize recent advancements in molecular profiling of the immune repertoires of brain metastases using biopsy‐based approaches, with an emphasis on tumor‐reactive T cells. Additionally, we discuss the potential of alternative tissues and technologies that offer improved temporal resolution, throughput, and fidelity for tracking tumor dynamics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.239
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain‐XSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207