MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400972548 · doi:10.1200/jco.24.00447

15-Gene Expression Profile and <i>PRAME</i> as Integrated Prognostic Test for Uveal Melanoma: First Report of Collaborative Ocular Oncology Group Study No. 2 (COOG2.1)

2024· article· en· W4400972548 on OpenAlexaff
J. William Harbour, Zélia M. Corrêa, Amy C Schefler, Prithvi Mruthyunjaya, Miguel A. Materin, Thomas Aaberg, Alison H. Skalet, David A. Reichstein, Ezekiel Weis, Ivana K. Kim, Timothy Fuller, Hakan Demirci, Kisha Piggott, Basil K. Williams, Eugene Shildkrot, Antonio Capone, Scott C. N. Oliver, Scott D. Walter, John O. Mason, Devron H. Char, Michael M. Altaweel, Jill R. Wells, Jay S. Duker, Peter Hovland, Dan S. Gombos, Tony Tsai, Cameron Javid, Brian P. Marr, Ang Gao, Christina L. Decatur, James J. Dollar, Stefan Kurtenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Eye Institute
KeywordsMedicineMelanomaOncologyInternal medicineOcular MelanomaTest (biology)Exact testCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE Validated and accurate prognostic testing is critical for precision medicine in uveal melanoma (UM). Our aims were to (1) prospectively validate an integrated prognostic classifier combining a 15-gene expression profile (15-GEP) and PRAME RNA expression and (2) identify clinical variables that enhance the prognostic accuracy of the 15-GEP/ PRAME classifier. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study included 1,577 patients with UM of the choroid and/or ciliary body who were enrolled in the Collaborative Ocular Oncology Group Study Number 2 (COOG2) and prospectively monitored across 26 North American centers. Test results for 15-GEP (class 1 or class 2) and PRAME expression status (negative or positive) were available for all patients. The primary end point was metastasis-free survival (MFS). RESULTS 15-GEP was class 1 in 1,082 (68.6%) and class 2 in 495 (31.4%) patients. PRAME status was negative in 1,106 (70.1%) and positive in 471 (29.9%) patients. Five-year MFS was 95.6% (95% CI, 93.9 to 97.4) for class 1/ PRAME (–), 80.6% (95% CI, 73.9 to 87.9) for class 1/ PRAME (+), 58.3% (95% CI, 51.1 to 66.4) for class 2/ PRAME (–), and 44.8% (95% CI, 37.9 to 52.8) for class 2/ PRAME (+). By multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, 15-GEP was the most important independent predictor of MFS (hazard ratio [HR], 5.95 [95% CI, 4.43 to 7.99]; P &lt; .001), followed by PRAME status (HR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.42 to 2.33]; P &lt; .001). The only clinical variable demonstrating additional prognostic value was tumor diameter. CONCLUSION In the largest prospective multicenter prognostic biomarker study performed to date in UM to our knowledge, the COOG2 study validated the superior prognostic accuracy of the integrated 15-GEP/ PRAME classifier over 15-GEP alone and clinical prognostic variables. Tumor diameter was found to be the only clinical variable to provide additional prognostic information. This prognostic classifier provides an advanced resource for risk-adjusted metastatic surveillance and adjuvant trial stratification in patients with UM.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations55
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207