MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406747600 · doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2024.100097

Collaborating across sectors in service of open science, precision oncology, and patients: an overview of the AACR Project GENIE (Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange) Biopharma Collaborative (BPC)

2025· article· en· W4406747600 on OpenAlexaff
Alyssa Acebedo, Philippe L. Bédard, Samantha Brown, Evelina Ceca, Michael V. Fiandalo, Hannah E. Fuchs, Xitong Guo, Jason Hoppe, Kenneth L. Kehl, Ritika Kundra, Jessica A. Lavery, Michele L. Lenoue-Newton, Eva M. Lepisto, Brooke Mastrogiacomo, Christine Micheel, Chelsea Nayan, Anna B. Newcomb, Chelsea Nichols, Katherine S. Panageas, Brian Piening, Suresh Pillai, Asha Postle, R Potter, Gregory J. Riely, Hira Rizvi, Julia E. Rudolph, Deborah Schrag, Shawn M. Sweeney, E. Alejandro Sweet‐Cordero, Michelle L. Turski, E. Wingord, Tony J. Wu, Thomas Yu, Celeste Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersGenentechNational Institutes of HealthSeagenGilead SciencesNational Comprehensive Cancer NetworkBayer HealthCareSanofiMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterGlaxoSmithKlineAmgenPfizerAmerican Association for Cancer ResearchAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsPrecision oncologyService (business)GenomicsOpen scienceData exchangeCancerMedicineKnowledge managementComputer scienceInternal medicineBusinessWorld Wide WebBiologyGenomeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Project GENIE (Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange) Biopharma Collaborative (BPC) is a multi-phase, pre-competitive collaboration between 10 biopharmaceutical companies and select GENIE-participating academic institutions, focused on detailed clinical annotations of a subset of patients within the GENIE Registry. The cohorts focus on 10 solid tumors, and each integrates demographic, diagnosis, genomic, and treatment data with longitudinal, real-world patient outcomes. Data are collected following a structured framework to ensure interoperability and forward compatibility with other data models. Each cohort undergoes a series of rigorous quality control and assurance protocols which ensures consistency, accuracy, and reliability of the data across multiple institutions before public release of the data. Initial analyses of the BPC data have yielded valuable insights, including the validation of treatment-induced resistance mutations and genomic drivers associated with anatomic sites of metastasis. Additionally, the real-world response endpoints compare favorably to published trial results. Central management and a shared knowledgebase help integrate diverse functional teams in the execution of a complex, multi-institutional data collection effort. Future directions aim to automate significant portions of the clinical annotation process to collect clinical data at scale. These efforts will increase the depth and granularity of the BPC data, as well as expand the overall cohort size and range of cancer types represented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.356 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESMO Real World Data and Digital OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207