MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110108978 · doi:10.1200/jco.2008.19.6048

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer Treated With Cetuximab: Overall and <i>KRAS</i>-Specific Results of the NCIC CTG and AGITG CO.17 Trial

2009· article· en· W2110108978 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heather‐Jane Au, Christos S. Karapetis, Chris J. O’Callaghan, Dongsheng Tu, Malcolm J. Moore, John Zalcberg, Hagen Kennecke, Jeremy Shapiro, Sheryl Koski, Nick Pavlakis, Danielle Charpentier, David Wyld, Michael Jefford, Gregory Knight, Nadine M Magoski, Michael Brundage, Derek J. Jonker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCetuximabMedicineKRASColorectal cancerInternal medicineOncologyQuality of life (healthcare)Cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 demonstrated the antiepidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody cetuximab improves overall and progression-free survival in patients with advanced, chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer (CRC), particularly in patients with wild-type KRAS tumors. This article reports the health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) outcomes from CO.17. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 572) with pretreated EGFR-detectable advanced CRC were randomly assigned to cetuximab and best supportive care (BSC) or to BSC alone. HRQL primary end points assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 were physical function (PF) and global health status (GHS); mean changes from baseline to 8 and 16 weeks were assessed. Post hoc analysis by KRAS mutation status was performed. RESULTS: Questionnaire compliance was 94% at baseline, but it declined differentially (67% v 47% for cetuximab v BSC at 16 weeks). PF change scores were -3.9 for cetuximab and -8.6 for BSC (P = .046) at 8 weeks and were -5.9 and -12.5 for cetuximab and BSC, respectively, (P = .027) at 16 weeks. GHS change scores were -0.5 and -7.1 (P = .008) at 8 weeks and were -3.6 and -15.2 (P = .008) at 16 weeks for cetuximab and BSC, respectively. In patients who had tumors with wild-type KRAS status, cetuximab resulted in less PF deterioration at 8 weeks (-0.7 v -7.2; P = .11) and 16 weeks (-3.4 v -13.8; P = .008) compared with BSC. Patients with wild-type status who received cetuximab experienced improved GHS at 8 weeks, whereas patients who received BSC alone deteriorated (3.2 v -7.7; P = .002). Cetuximab preserved GHS at 16 weeks (-0.2 v -18.1; P < .001). No significant differences were noted between study arms for patients with mutated KRAS tumors. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab offers important HRQL and survival benefits for pretreated patients with advanced, wild-type KRAS CRC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207