MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1844357666

Canadian Association of General Surgeons and American College of Surgeons Evidence-Based Reviews in Surgery. 25.: Perioperative chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable gastric cancer

2008· article· en· W1844357666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Harry Henteleff, Richard Malthaner, Carlton C. Barnett

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeSurgeryHazard ratioChemotherapyRandomized controlled trialEpirubicinRandomizationConfidence intervalInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Question: Does perioperative adjuvant therapy improve the outcome of operable gastric cancer? Design: Multicentre randomized controlled trial. Setting: Forty-five centres in the United Kingdom as well as centres in the Netherlands, Germany, Brazil, Singapore and New Zealand. Patients: Five hundred and three patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach, esophogastric junction or lower esophagus were randomized to perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery (n = 250 patients) or surgery alone (n = 253 patients). Interventions: Patients who were assigned to the perioperative chemotherapy and surgery group received 3 doses of chemotherapy (epirubicin, cisplatin and fluorouracil) preoperatively, followed by surgery 3–6 weeks after the third dose, and then 3 doses of postoperative chemotherapy beginning 6–12 weeks after surgery. Patients assigned to surgery alone were scheduled to have surgery within 6 weeks of randomization. The main outcome measure was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, assessments of downstaging, the surgeon's assessment of whether the surgery was curative and quality of life. Results: Rates of postoperative complications were similar in both groups (46% v. 45%, respectively), as were the numbers of deaths within 30 days of surgery. The resected tumours were significantly smaller and less advanced in the group that received perioperative chemotherapy. With a mean follow-up of 4 years, 144 (60%) of the patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 170 (67%) of the patients in the surgery group died. The likelihood of overall survival was higher in the perioperative chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] for death 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60–0.93; p = 0.009; 5-year survival rate 36% v. 23%), as was the likelihood of progression-free survival (HR for progression 0.66; 95% CI 0.53–0.81; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Compared with the group receiving surgery alone, overall survival improved in the group receiving perioperative chemotherapy, as did progression-free survival among patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach, esophogastric junction or lower esophagus.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207