Circadian Rhythm in Rest and Activity: A Biological Correlate of Quality of Life and a Predictor of Survival in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rest-activity circadian rhythm (CircAct) reflects the function of the circadian timing system. In a prior single-institution study, the extent of CircAct perturbation independently predicted for survival and tumor response in 192 patients receiving chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Moreover, the main CircAct parameters correlated with several health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scales. In this prospective study, we attempted to extend these results to an independent cohort of chemotherapy-naive metastatic colorectal cancer patients participating in an international randomized phase III trial (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 05963). Patients were randomized to receive chronomodulated or conventional infusion of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients from nine institutions completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 and wore a wrist accelerometer (actigraph) for 3 days before chemotherapy delivery. Two validated parameters (I |0.25|; P < 0.01). I<O further independently predicted for overall survival with a hazard ratio of 0.94 (P < 0.0001). The associations between CircAct parameters, HRQoL, and survival, which were shown in this international study involving previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients, confirm prior single-institution findings in mostly pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients. The circadian timing system constitutes a novel therapeutic target. Interventions that normalize circadian timing system dysfunction may affect quality of life and survival in cancer 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".