MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401988220 · doi:10.1200/po.24.00269

A Targeted Methylation–Based Multicancer Early Detection Blood Test Preferentially Detects High-Grade Prostate Cancer While Minimizing Overdiagnosis of Indolent Disease

2024· article· en· W4401988220 on OpenAlexaff
Brandon A. Mahal, Matthew Margolis, Earl Hubbell, Cheng Chen, Jeffrey M. Venstrom, John Abran, Jordan J. Karlitz, Alexander W. Wyatt, Eric A. Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Precision Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEMD SeronoRegeneron PharmaceuticalsGenentechAstraZenecaPfizerDOD Prostate Cancer Research ProgramSanofiFoundation MedicineProstate Cancer FoundationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsOverdiagnosisProstate cancerMedicineOncologyBlood testDiseaseInternal medicineCancer researchPathologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE Indolent prostate cancer (PCa) is prevalent in the intended use population (adults age 50-79 years) for blood-based multicancer early detection (MCED) tests. We examined the detectability of PCa by a clinically validated, targeted methylation–based MCED test. METHODS Detectability by Gleason grade group (GG), clinical stage, association of detection status with tumor methylated fraction (TMeF), and overall survival (OS) were assessed in substudy 3 of Circulating Cell-Free Genome Atlas (CCGA; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02889978 ) and PATHFINDER (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04241796 ) studies. RESULTS Test sensitivity for PCa in substudy 3 of CCGA was 11.2% (47/420). The test detected 0 (0%) of 58 low-grade (GG1), 3 (1.9%) of 157 favorable intermediate-grade (GG2), 4 (5.1%) of 78 unfavorable intermediate-grade (GG3), and 36 (31.9%) of 113 high-grade (GG4 and 5) cancers and 3 (3.2%) of 95 stage I, 11 (4.7%) of 235 stage II, 7 (14.9%) of 47 stage III, and 22 (81.5%) of 27 stage IV cases. The median TMeF was higher for detected than nondetected cases (2,106.0 parts per million [PPM]; IQR, 349.8-24,376.3 v 24.4 PPM; IQR, 17.8-38.5; P < .05). Nondetected cases had better OS ( P < .05; hazard ratio [HR], 0.263 [95% CI, 0.104 to 0.533]) and detected cases had similar survival ( P = .2; HR, 0.672 [95% CI, 0.323 to 1.21]) compared with SEER adjusted for age, GG, and stage. Performance was similar in PATHFINDER, with no detected GG1/2 (0/13) or stage I/II (0/16) cases. CONCLUSION This MCED test preferentially detects high-grade, clinically significant PCa. Use in population-based screening programs in addition to standard-of-care screening is unlikely to exacerbate overdiagnosis of indolent PCa.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Precision OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207