MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388671204 · doi:10.1111/his.15078

Optimizing tissue stewardship in non‐small cell lung cancer to support molecular characterization and treatment selection: statement from a working group of thoracic pathologists

2023· review· en· W4388671204 on OpenAlexaff
Keith M. Kerr, Lukas Bubendorf, Fernando López‐Ríos, Farah Khalil, Sinchita Roy‐Chowdhuri, Philippe Joubert, Arndt Hartmann, Elena Guerini‐Rocco, Yasushi Yatabe, Paul Hofman, Wendy A. Cooper, Sanja Đačić

Bibliographic record

VenueHistopathology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersPfizerAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsBiomarkerLung cancerGuidelineMedicineStewardship (theology)Intensive care medicineSelection (genetic algorithm)PathologyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many patients with non-small cell lung cancer do not receive guideline-recommended, biomarker-directed therapy, despite the potential for improved clinical outcomes. Access to timely, accurate, and comprehensive molecular profiling, including targetable protein overexpression, is essential to allow fully informed treatment decisions to be taken. In turn, this requires optimal tissue management to protect and maximize the use of this precious finite resource. Here, a group of leading thoracic pathologists recommend factors to consider for optimal tissue management. Starting from when lung cancer is first suspected, keeping predictive biomarker testing in the front of the mind should drive the development of practices and procedures that conserve tissue appropriately to support molecular characterization and treatment selection.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.332
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistopathologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207