Natural history and chemotherapy effectiveness for advanced adenocarcinoma of the small bowel: a retrospective review of 113 cases.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Small bowel adenocarcinoma is a rare cancer that has generally been considered resistant to chemotherapy, although little has been published on the role of chemotherapy. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients with advanced small bowel adenocarcinoma to explore chemotherapy use, and gain knowledge for ongoing management and future clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the small bowel treated at Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) between 1986 and 2004 were identified through the cancer registry. The medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics, treatment and outcome data. Survival statistics were estimated using the Kaplan Meier survival curves and Cox proportional regression model. RESULTS: Data on 113 patients was reviewed. Forty-four patients received palliative chemotherapy with an overall response rate (ORR) of 36% during a first or second line regimen (9% complete responses and 27% partial responses). Newer chemotherapy regimens including gemcitabine and irinotecan combinations appeared to have higher ORR, than older fluorouracil-based regimens. Some patients responded to more than one line of chemotherapy. Palliative chemotherapy predicted for overall survival (OS) in a multivariate analysis (HR 0.47, P = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy appears to have activity in adenocarcinoma of the small bowel. Prospective trials evaluating patient benefit are required to confirm this activity using newer systemic therapies, until such time retrospective reviews such as this will continue to guide treatment decisions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".