Adverse Effects of Bevacizumab During Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:Bevacizumab has been increasingly used in combination chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic or recurrent colorectal cancer.The aim of this report is to underline the possible risks associated with bevacizumab use. Methods:Between July 2005 and March 2013, a total of 130 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who received oxaliplatin as first-line chemotherapy were divided into 2 groups those treated with bevacizumab (group A) and those without (group B), and compared. The primary endpoint was to clarify the profile of bevacizumab - induced adverse effects. Secondary endpoints examined therapeutic effects, including overall survival (OS). Results:The incidence of major side effects was almost equivalent, except for bleeding, between the 2 groups. With regard to the therapeutic effects, 1 patient in group A showed complete disappearance of multiple lung metastases without any evidence of recurrence. The median OS was 926 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 756 - 1257) in group A and 534 days (95% CI, 421 - 621) in group B (p < 0.01). Conclusion:The results demonstrate that bevacizumab prolonged survival in these patients although there was an increased risk of clinically significant bleeding.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it