MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392617890 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noae041

Executive summary of the American Radium Society appropriate use criteria for brain metastases in epidermal growth factor receptor mutated-mutated and ALK-fusion non-small cell lung cancer

2024· article· en· W4392617890 on OpenAlexaff
Seema Nagpal, Michael T. Milano, Veronica Chiang, Scott G. Soltys, Alexandria Brackett, Lia M. Halasz, Amit Garg, Arjun Sahgal, Manmeet S. Ahluwalia, Martin C. Tom, Joshua D. Palmer, Jonathan Knisely, Samuel T. Chao, Melanie Hayden Gephart, Tony J. C. Wang, Simon S. Lo, Eric L. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerOncologyRadiation therapyAnaplastic lymphoma kinaseInternal medicineEpidermal growth factor receptorPrecision medicineCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Radium Society (ARS) Central Nervous System (CNS) committee reviewed literature on epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) and ALK-fusion (ALK+) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the treatment of brain metastases (BrMs) from non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) to generate appropriate use guidelines addressing use of TKIs in conjunction with or in lieu of radiotherapy (RT). The panel developed three key questions to guide systematic review: can radiotherapy be deferred in patients receiving EGFR or ALK TKIs at (1) diagnosis or (2) recurrence? Should TKI be administered concurrently with RT (3)? Two literature searches were performed (May 2019 and December 2023). The panel developed 8 model cases and voted on treatment options using a 9-point scale, with 1-3, 4-6 and 7-9 corresponding to usually not appropriate, may be appropriate, and usually appropriate (respectively), per the UCLA/RAND Appropriateness Method. Consensus was achieved in only 4 treatment scenarios, all consistent with existing ARS-AUC guidelines for multiple BrM. The panel did not reach consensus that RT can be appropriately deferred in patients with BrM receiving CNS penetrant ALK or EGFR TKIs, though median scores indicated deferral may be appropriate under most circumstances. Whole brain RT with concurrent TKI generated broad disagreement except in cases with 2-4 BrM, where it was considered usually not appropriate. We identified no definitive studies dictating optimal sequencing of TKIs and RT for EGFRm and ALK+ BrM. Until such studies are completed, the committee hopes these cases guide decision- making in this complex clinical space.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.020

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207