MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407758786 · doi:10.51731/cjht.2025.1078

Pembrolizumab (Keytruda)

2025· article· en· W4407758786 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CDA-AMC

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPembrolizumabMedicineInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s Drug Agency (CDA-AMC) recommends that Keytruda be reimbursed by public drug plans for the adjuvant treatment of adult patients with stage IB (with tumour[s] of 4 cm in diameter or larger), II, or IIIA non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have undergone complete resection and platinum-based chemotherapy and whose tumours have a PD-L1 tumour proportion score (TPS) of less than 50%, as determined by a validated test, if certain conditions are met. Keytruda should only be covered to treat patients aged 18 years or older who have a diagnosis of stage IB (with tumour[s] of 4 cm in diameter or larger), II, or IIIA NSCLC whose tumours have been completely surgically removed, who have received platinum-based chemotherapy, whose tumours have a PD-L1 TPS of less than 50% as determined by pathology testing, and who are in relatively good health (as measured by performance status). Keytruda should not be covered for patients who have received or planned to receive radiation therapy before or after surgery, and/or who are receiving other drugs before surgery to shrink a tumour or stop its spread. Also, Keytruda should not be covered to treat patients who have had previous treatment with drugs that change how the immune system works. Keytruda should only be reimbursed if it is prescribed by clinicians with expertise in managing lung cancer and the price of Keytruda is reduced.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health TechnologiesSame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207