MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1933195564 · doi:10.3109/10428194.2015.1055480

Impact of time from diagnosis to initiation of curative chemotherapy on survival of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

2015· article· en· W1933195564 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin A. Hay, Benny Lee, Özge Göktepe, Joseph M. Connors, Laurie H. Sehn, Kerry J. Savage, Richard Klasa, Tamara Shenkier, Alina S. Gerrie, Diego Villa

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of CanadaBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaInternal medicineChemotherapyLymphomaGastroenterologyMultivariate analysisCHOPOncologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although it is generally regarded appropriate to start chemotherapy promptly after a diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the optimal time from diagnosis to treatment (TDT) is unknown. A total of 689 patients diagnosed with DLBCL and treated with ≥ 1 cycle of CHOP-R with curative intent during 2003-2008 in British Columbia were identified: 347 (50%) TDT ≤ 4 weeks, 277 (40%) TDT 5-8 weeks, 65 (10%) TDT > 8 weeks. For the respective TDT groups, 5-year OS estimates were 61%, 74%, 63% (p = 0.006); 5-year PFS 57%, 70%, 61% (p = 0.006); and 5-year DSS 64%, 80%, 77% (p <0.001). In multivariate analysis, TDT >8 weeks was associated with worse OS (HR 1.20 (95% CI 1.03, 1.41), p = 0.020), PFS (HR 1.33 (95% CI 1.15, 1.54), p < 0.001), and DSS (HR 1.40 (95% CI 1.10, 1.78), p = 0.006). Clinicians should endeavor to initiate curative chemotherapy as soon as possible after a diagnosis of DLBCL is established.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphomaSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207