MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416414271 · doi:10.1038/s41597-025-06068-4

The ICGC ARGO data dictionary for standardizing global cancer clinical data

2025· article· en· W4416414271 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hardeep K. Nahal-Bose, Péter Lichter, Ursula Weber, Lincoln Stein, Rosita Bajari, Edmund Su, Jon Eubank, Ciarán Schütte, Christina K. Yung, Mélanie Courtot

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsIndoc ResearchUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsInteroperabilityCancerClinical OncologyArgoPrecision oncologyGermlineGenomeGenomicsMetadata

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Cancer Genome Consortium Accelerating Research in Genomic Oncology (ICGC ARGO) project is an international initiative to sequence germline and tumour genomes from 100,000 cancer patients across 13 countries and 22 tumour types. By integrating genomic data with comprehensive clinical information including treatment outcomes, lifestyle, environmental exposures and family history, ICGC ARGO aims to accelerate the application of genomic insights in cancer diagnosis, treatment and prevention. However, a major challenge is harmonizing clinical data from diverse tumour types worldwide. To address this, the ICGC ARGO Data Dictionary was developed to ensure consistent high-quality clinical data collection by defining a minimal set of clinical fields within an event-based data model to capture clinical relationships and support longitudinal data collection. Grounded in international standardized terminology, it is interoperable with other data standards such as Minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE). Its adoption by global initiatives such as the European-Canadian Cancer Network (EUCANCan) and the Marathon of Hope Cancer Centres Network (MOHCCN) underscores its broad impact on advancing precision oncology research.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0060.010
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.335 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207