Precision Oncology, Artificial Intelligence, and Novel Therapeutic Advancements in the Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment of Cancer: Highlights from the 59th Irish Association for Cancer Research (IACR) Annual Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in oncology, especially with the era of precision oncology, is resulting in a paradigm shift in cancer care. Indeed, innovative technologies, such as artificial intelligence, are paving the way towards enhanced diagnosis, prevention, and personalised treatments as well as novel drug discoveries. Despite excellent progress, the emergence of resistant cancers has curtailed both the pace and extent to which we can advance. By combining both their understanding of the fundamental biological mechanisms and technological advancements such as artificial intelligence and data science, cancer researchers are now beginning to address this. Together, this will revolutionise cancer care, by enhancing molecular interventions that may aid cancer prevention, inform clinical decision making, and accelerate the development of novel therapeutic drugs. Here, we will discuss the advances and approaches in both artificial intelligence and precision oncology, presented at the 59th Irish Association for Cancer Research annual conference.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".