Tumor response and clinical toxicity associated with second‐line chemotherapy regimens for advanced non‐squamous non‐small cell lung cancer: A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previously reported superior tumor response of pemetrexed in the second-line setting for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (advNS-NSCLC) has never been confirmed in real-world studies. Platinum-based doublet is frequently used in the second-line setting for advanced NSCLC in China. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted including patients receiving pemetrexed or docetaxel-based chemotherapy in the second-line setting for advNS-NSCLC in four Chinese tertiary care hospitals. Propensity score matched treatment groups were created for head-to-head comparisons on best tumor response and clinical toxicity. Multiple regression analyses were performed to rank the impact of the four regimens on the risks of tumor progression and hematological adverse events. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-four patients were included for creating matched treatment groups for pemetrexed versus platinum/pemetrexed (33 pairs), docetaxel (17 pairs), and platinum/docetaxel (29 pairs), respectively. No significant differences were identified for best tumor response between pemetrexed and the other three regimens. However, pemetrexed was associated with significantly fewer patients experiencing anemia (39.4% vs. 69.7%, P = 0.004) and neutropenia (6.1% vs. 30.3%, P = 0.021) than platinum/pemetrexed. Multiple regression analyses indicated that pemetrexed was associated with significantly slower tumor progression (hazard ratio 0.628, P = 0.040) and a significantly lower risk of neutropenia (odds ratio 0.132, P = 0.019) than docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed was associated with significantly postponed tumor progression and significantly less hematological toxicity than docetaxel in the real-world second-line setting for advNS-NSCLC in Chinese patients. Pemetrexed monotherapy had comparable tumor response, but significantly less hematological toxicity than pemetrexed-based doublet.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".