MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393237710 · doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2024.101487

Microbiome bacterial influencers of host immunity and response to immunotherapy

2024· article· en· W4393237710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLawson Health Research Institute
FundersWeston Family FoundationLotte and John Hecht Memorial Foundation
KeywordsMicrobiomeImmunotherapyImmunologyMedicineImmune systemImmunityAdjuvantGut floraBiologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gut microbiota influences anti-tumor immunity and can induce or inhibit response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Therefore, microbiome features are being studied as predictive/prognostic biomarkers of patient response to ICIs, and microbiome-based interventions are attractive adjuvant treatments in combination with ICIs. Specific gut-resident bacteria can influence the effectiveness of immunotherapy; however, the mechanism of action on how these bacteria affect anti-tumor immunity and response to ICIs is not fully understood. Nevertheless, early bacterial-based therapeutic strategies have demonstrated that targeting the gut microbiome through various methods can enhance the effectiveness of ICIs, resulting in improved clinical responses in patients with a diverse range of cancers. Therefore, understanding the microbiota-driven mechanisms of response to immunotherapy can augment the success of these interventions, particularly in patients with treatment-refractory cancers.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.263 · 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