MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387376978 · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.08.014

Current and new frontiers in hereditary cancer surveillance: Opportunities for liquid biopsy

2023· review· en· W4387376978 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kirsten M. Farncombe, Derek Wong, Maia Norman, Leslie E. Oldfield, Julia A. Sobotka, Mark Basik, Yvonne Bombard, Victoria Carile, Lesa Dawson, William D. Foulkes, David Malkin, Aly Karsan, Patricia C. Parkin, Lynette S. Penney, Aaron Pollett, Kasmintan A. Schrader, Trevor J. Pugh, Raymond H. Kim, Adriana Aguilar‐Mahecha, Melyssa Aronson, Nancy N. Baxter, Phil Bedard, Hal K. Berman, Marcus Q. Bernardini, Clarissa Chan, Tulin Cil, Blaise Clarke, Irfan Dhalla, Christine Elser, Gabrielle Ene, Sarah E. Ferguson, Laura Genge, Robert Gryfe, Michelle Jacobson, Monika Kastner, Pardeep Kaurah, Josiane Lafleur, Jordan Lerner‐Ellis, Stéphanie Lheureux, Shelley M. MacDonald, Jeanna McCuaig, Brian Mckee, Nicole Mittmann, Seema Panchal, Carolyn Piccinin, Dean A. Regier, Zoulikha Rezoug, Krista Rideout, Kara Semotiuk, Sara Singh, Lillian L. Siu, Sophie Sun, Emily Thain, Karin Wallace, Thomas R. Ward, Shelley Westergard, Stacy Whittle, Wei Xu, Celeste Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Human Genetics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenJewish General HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalMount Sinai HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalMcGill UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersSharks FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFDC FoundationCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoCanadian Cancer SocietyGarron Family Cancer CentreCanadian Imperial Bank of CommerceChildren's Tumor FoundationOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPrincess Margaret Cancer FoundationTerry Fox Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineCancerLynch syndromeLi–Fraumeni syndromeLiquid biopsyGenetic testingMLH1Cancer screeningOncologyGermline mutationInternal medicineGeneticsMutationBiologyDNA mismatch repairGeneColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At least 5% of cancer diagnoses are attributed to a causal pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline genetic variant (hereditary cancer syndrome-HCS). These individuals are burdened with lifelong surveillance monitoring organs for a wide spectrum of cancers. This is associated with substantial uncertainty and anxiety in the time between screening tests and while the individuals are awaiting results. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing has recently shown potential as a non-invasive strategy for monitoring cancer. There is an opportunity for high-yield cancer early detection in HCS. To assess clinical validity of cfDNA in individuals with HCS, representatives from eight genetics centers from across Canada founded the CHARM (cfDNA in Hereditary and High-Risk Malignancies) Consortium in 2017. In this perspective, we discuss operationalization of this consortium and early data emerging from the most common and well-characterized HCSs: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, Li-Fraumeni syndrome, and Neurofibromatosis type 1. We identify opportunities for the incorporation of cfDNA sequencing into surveillance protocols; these opportunities are backed by examples of earlier cancer detection efficacy in HCSs from the CHARM Consortium. We seek to establish a paradigm shift in early cancer surveillance in individuals with HCSs, away from highly centralized, regimented medical screening visits and toward more accessible, frequent, and proactive care for these high-risk individuals.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Human GeneticsSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207