Systematic literature review of the epidemiology of neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase positive solid tumor sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: This study aimed to expand on existing systematic literature reviews (SLRs) by assessing the prevalence of neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) fusion-positive mutations across solid tumors in adult U.S populations. It further evaluated incidence, testing, treatment, mortality, and progression rates by tumor type, extending evidence through 2023. MATERIALS & METHODS: A SLR was conducted following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines, with searches across Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from 2013 to August 2023. Eligibility criteria included studies on NTRK fusion-positive tumors in patients aged ≥12 years. Data were extracted and assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and JBI checklist. RESULTS: This SLR identified 160 studies, reporting NTRK fusion prevalence ranging from 0.03% to 0.70% across solid tumors. TRK inhibitors, particularly larotrectinib and entrectinib, were commonly used treatments. Prevalence varied significantly by cancer type, being higher in rarer cancers, such as papillary thyroid carcinoma (up to 21.4%). CONCLUSIONS: NTRK fusions are rare, with wide prevalence variability among cancer types. The findings highlight the need for standardized diagnostic methods and larger real-world studies to improve prevalence estimates and assess the impact of NTRK fusions on outcomes, ultimately aiding in the optimization of targeted treatments for affected patients.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".