Perioperative Chemotherapy for Gastroesophageal Cancer in British Columbia: A Multicentre Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2006, perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (ecf), compared with surgery alone, demonstrated a significant survival benefit in resectable gastroesophageal cancers. We report the results of our experience with that protocol. METHODS: The BC Cancer Agency (bcca) is a multicentre institution that treats most oncology patients for the province. Characteristics of the 83 bcca patients with localized gastric, gastroesophageal junction, or lower esophageal cancer who initiated perioperative chemotherapy either ecf or epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ecx) from 2008 to 2011 were abstracted to an anonymous database and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 83 patients in the cohort [66 men; median age: 62 years (range: 37-79 years)], 87.9% completed 3 cycles of perioperative chemotherapy, and 93.9% (n = 78) underwent an attempt at surgery (2 patients died of chemotherapy toxicities, 1 refused surgery, and 2 developed disease progression before surgery). In 11 of the surgeries (14.1%), tumours could not be resected because of unresectability (n = 1), liver metastasis (n = 1), and peritoneal carcinomatosis (n = 9). One patient died of surgical complications. The 6 patients (7.2%) who achieved a pathologic complete response are all alive and recurrence-free. Of 46 patients (55.4%) who subsequently began postoperative chemotherapy, 44.5% completed 3 cycles. Estimated median survival was 40.3 months. Weight loss was the only significant prognostic factor for worse overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our multicentre experience confirmed the feasibility of the magic protocol in a real-world scenario and showed that ecx is also an adequate regimen in the perioperative setting. Weight loss was the only significant prognostic factor for worse overall survival. All patients who achieved a pathologic complete response are recurrence-free after a median follow-up of 40.3 months.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".