MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408387396 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32030163

A Recurrent Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Harboring an EML4–ALK Fusion Mutation with Sustained Response to Ensartinib: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4408387396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hao Jiang, Tengfei Zhu, Zeng-Hao Chang, Ziyu Liu, Wei Ou, Siyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFusion geneCancer researchMutationLung cancerGeneOncologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine tumor. Lung cancer patients with ALK and EML4 fusions respond significantly to ALK inhibitors. The EML4-ALK fusion gene mutation is the result of an inversion of chromosome 2, which juxtaposes the 5 end of the EML4 gene with the 3 end of the ALK gene. In SCLC, the frequency of fusion genes is very low, and to the best of our knowledge, only four cases of ALK fusion gene mutations in SCLC have been reported. In this report, we describe the treatment of a 74-year-old female patient with SCLC who developed recurrence of hilar lymph node metastasis three years after surgical resection. Postoperative NGS showed that this patient is a SCLC patient harboring a rare EML4-ALK fusion mutation, and a satisfactory 43-month overall survival (OS) was achieved after treatment with ensartinib targeting the EML4-ALK fusion gene mutation. The ALK-TKI may be a new treatment option for these patients. This article provides a therapeutic reference.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207