MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409264686 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-24-3791

The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Perspective on Liquid Biopsy– and Radiomics-Based Technologies for Immuno-oncology Biomarker Discovery and Application

2025· review· en· W4409264686 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Monette, Adriana Aguilar‐Mahecha, Emre Altınmakas, Mathew G. Angelos, Nima Assad, Gerald Batist, Praveen K. Bommareddy, Diana L. Bonilla, Christoph H. Borchers, S. Church, Gennaro Ciliberto, Alexandria P. Cogdill, Luigi Fattore, Nir Hacohen, Mohammad Haris, Vincent Lacasse, Wen‐Rong Lie, Arnav Mehta, Marco Ruella, Houssein Abdul Sater, Alan Spatz, Bachir Taouli, Imad Tarhoni, Edgar Gonzalez‐Kozlova, Itay Tirosh, Xiaodong Wang, Sacha Gnjatic

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsZymeworks (Canada)McGill UniversityOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchJewish General Hospital
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBiomarkerBiomarker discoveryMedicineMedical physicsRadiomicsEmerging technologiesBiobankComputer scienceData scienceBioinformaticsArtificial intelligenceProteomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immuno-oncology is increasingly becoming the standard of care for cancers, with the identification of biomarkers that reliably classify immune checkpoint inhibitor response, resistance, and toxicity becoming the next frontier toward improvements in immunomodulatory treatment regimens. Recent advances in multiparametric, multiomics, and computational data platforms generating an unprecedented depth of data may assist in the discovery of increasingly robust biomarkers for enhanced patient selection and more personalized or longitudinal treatment approaches. Which emerging technologies to implement in future research and clinical settings, used alone or in combination, relies on weighing the pros and cons that aid in maximizing data outputs while minimizing patient sampling, with high reproducibility and representativeness, and minimal turnaround time and data fragmentation toward later private and public dataset harmonization strategies. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Biomarkers Committee convened to identify important advances in biomarker technologies and highlight advances in biomarker discovery using liquid biopsy and in vivo imaging technologies. We address advances in liquid biopsy technologies monitoring cells, proteins, nucleic acids, antibodies, and drugs or analytes and radiomics technologies monitoring whole host-level imaging methods, including immuno-PET and MRI technologies, which are able to couple biomarkers with physical location. We include a summary of key metrics obtained by these technologies and their ease of interpretation, limitations and dependencies, technical improvements, and outward comparisons. By highlighting some of the most interesting recent examples contributed by these technologies and providing examples of improved outputs, we hope to guide correlative research directions and assist in their becoming clinically useful in immuno-oncology.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0150.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.008

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.437 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207