MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389923062 · doi:10.3390/ijms242417582

Mesenchymal–Epithelial Transition Kinase Inhibitor Therapy in Patients with Advanced Papillary Renal-Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4389923062 on OpenAlexaff
Francisco Cézar Aquino de Moraes, Maysa Vilbert, Vinícius Freire Costa Alves, Gustavo de Oliveira Almeida, Jonathan N. Priantti, Thiago Madeira, Carlos Stecca, Marianne Rodrigues Fernandes, Ney Pereira Carneiro dos Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversidade Federal do ParáConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisInternal medicinePapillary renal cell carcinomasRenal cell carcinomaAdverse effectOncologyCohortCarcinomaGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Papillary subtypes of renal-cell carcinoma (pRCC) represent 10–15% of the cases and commonly have MET alterations. This systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis evaluated MET inhibitor therapy (METi) efficacy and safety in adults with confirmed advanced pRCC. The search strategy included PubMed, Web-of-science, Cochrane, and Scopus. We used the DerSimonian/Laird random effect model for all analyses; p-value < 5% was considered significant, and heterogeneity was assessed with I2. Three clinical trials and six cohort studies were included with 504 patients; 31% were MET-driven. Our pooled analysis demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) in MET-driven, MET-independent, and overall patients of: 36% (95%CI: 10–62), 0% (95%CI: 0–3), and 21% (95%CI: 1–41), respectively. One-year disease control and progression-free survival rates were, respectively, 70% (95%CI: 52–88) and 15% (95%CI: 10–20). Twelve- and twenty-four-month survival rates were, respectively, 43% (95%CI: 23–64) and 10% (95%CI: 0–30). The prevalence of adverse events of any grade and grades 3–5 were 96% (95%CI: 91–100) and 44% (95%CI: 37–50), respectively. We suggest METi has anti-tumor activity and is tolerable in patients with advanced pRCC.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.029
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→