Evaluating the Impact on Quality of Life of Chemoradiation in Gastric Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our phase I study prospectively evaluated quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing adjuvant chemoradiation for gastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Thirty-three patients receiving radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions), together with 12 weeks of infusional 5-fluorouacil and escalating doses of cisplatin every 2 weeks, completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 at five time points: baseline, completion of radiation, 4 weeks after completion of radiation, 6-12 months after completion of chemoradiation, and 2-3 years after completion of chemoradiation. RESULTS: Mean age of the patients was 56 years (range: 31-77 years); 55% of the patients were male. Median follow-up was 2.7 years (range: 0.3-5 years). The 3-year overall survival was 83%. Five patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Median scores on global QOL and on the social, role, emotional, nausea and vomiting, and fatigue scales showed clinically and statistically significant worsening at completion of radiation. Statistical but not clinical worsening was found for the physical and appetite scales. By 6-12 months, no subscale showed a difference, on average, from the baseline score. However, up to 45% of the patients remained below baseline on at least 1 subscale. Patients with DLT had worse scores on the emotional and the nausea and vomiting scales. Scores for global QOL and for nausea and vomiting were significantly associated with chemotherapy dose. CONCLUSIONS: During chemoradiation, QOL is impaired. Although most scores return to baseline, recovery may take 6-12 months, and subscale scores remain below baseline in a significant proportion 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".