MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396774129 · doi:10.1080/17474086.2024.2353772

Advances in our understanding of genetic markers and targeted therapies for pediatric LCH

2024· article· en· W4396774129 on OpenAlexaff
Aban Bahabri, Oussama Abla

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Hematology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistiocytic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLangerhans cell histiocytosisMedicineHistiocytosisMyeloidTargeted therapyPathologyImmunologyDiseaseInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a rare myeloid neoplasm, encompassing a diverse clinical spectrum ranging from localized bone or skin lesions to a multisystemic life-threatening condition. Over the past decade, there has been an expansion in understanding the molecular biology of LCH, which translated into innovative targeted therapeutic approaches. AREAS COVERED: In this article, we will review the molecular alterations observed in pediatric LCH and the relationship between these molecular changes and the clinical phenotype, as well as targeted therapies in LCH. EXPERT OPINION: Mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway mutation is a hallmark of LCH and is identified in 80% of the cases. Notably, BRAFV600E mutation is seen in ~50-60% of the cases, ~30% has other MAPK pathway mutations, while 15-20% have no detected mutations. While the first line therapeutic approach is vinblastine and prednisone, targeted therapies - specifically BRAF/MEK inhibitors - emerged as a promising second-line salvage strategy, particularly when a mutation is identified. Most patients respond to BRAF/MEK inhibitors but at least 75% reactivate after stopping, however, most patients respond again when restarting inhibitors.

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)0.002
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of HematologySame topicHistiocytic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207