MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405407747 · doi:10.1172/jci184790

Immune-molecular interactions in high-grade serous ovarian cancer distinguish long-term survivors

2024· article· en· W4405407747 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeanette E. Boudreau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Investigation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteDalhousie University
FundersOvarian Cancer Canada
KeywordsSerous ovarian cancerOvarian cancerTerm (time)Immune systemSerous fluidMedicineCancerBiologyOncologyBioinformaticsCancer researchInternal medicineImmunologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The approach and efficacy of treatments for high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) of the ovary have changed little in decades. Although numerous studies demonstrated immune infiltration as frequent and prognostically beneficial, clinical trials of immunotherapies have generated benefit in fewer than 15% of patients. In this issue of the JCI, Nelson and colleagues compiled 1,233 HGSC samples from patients across four continents and compared the molecular and immunologic features that associate with long-term survival (greater than 10 years). Diversity among HGSC tumors is well defined, but this study explored the combined influence of immunologic and molecular features. Long-term survivors harbored tumors with high epithelial content and overrepresentation of the C4/differentiated molecular signature, with cytotoxic T and B cells infiltrating to the tumor epithelium and stroma, respectively. These findings highlight features that might underly poor responsiveness to existing immunotherapies of most HGSC tumors and considerations for the design of future, more precise treatments for HGSC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207