MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414160640 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdaf104

Biomarkers of immunotherapy response in neuro-oncology

2025· review· en· W4414160640 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Landry, Yosef Ellenbogen, Andrew Ajisebutu, Chloe Gui, Andrew Gao, Farshad Nassiri, Gelareh Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunotherapyClinical trialBiomarkerLiquid biopsyImmune systemBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While immunotherapy has shown significant promise for many cancers, its translation into the treatment of brain tumors has been limited. While several immunotherapy trials have been negative in brain cancer, these studies have identified a subset of responders which has generated considerable excitement for the future of the field. In this review, we summarize promising immunotherapy response biomarkers for CNS tumors with a focus on brain metastases, glioblastoma, and meningioma. The potential value of genomic, transcriptomic, cellular, proteomic, radiologic, and liquid biopsy approaches are discussed in a tumor-specific fashion. We emphasize the need to validate and expand upon each of these purported biomarkers. Disease-specific immunotherapy response biomarkers may potentially lead to more efficacious clinical trial designs, ultimately leading to new treatment options for a subset of 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

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207