MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Disparities in the Use of Chemotherapy and Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Elderly Advanced Colorectal Cancer Patients in the Community Oncology Setting

2008· article· en· W2124531563 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Cancer Agency
KeywordsMedicineBevacizumabColorectal cancerIrinotecanInternal medicineChemotherapyOxaliplatinOncologyCetuximabGeriatric oncologyClinical trialMedical recordCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Learning Objectives After completing this course, the reader will be able to: Identify reported differences between advanced colorectal cancer patients treated in community oncology clinics and those enrolled in clinical trials.Describe gaps in the existing evidence for the treatment of elderly advanced colorectal cancer patients.Describe the need for improving tools to appropriately select patients for treatment. CME This article is available for continuing medical education credit at CME.TheOncologist.com Background. The clinical trials on which the treatment of advanced colorectal (CRC) is based enroll few elderly patients. Furthermore, few investigations have determined the use and outcomes of the treatment of advanced CRC in practice. This study evaluated the treatment of advanced CRC in community oncology practices, focusing on age-related differences in treatment and outcome. Methods. A national, retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate the management of advanced CRC in 10 community practices across the U.S. All medical records of patients diagnosed with advanced CRC initiating chemotherapy treatment after January 1, 2003 through 2006 were included. The primary aim was to compare the proportion receiving doublet chemotherapy (irinotecan or oxaliplatin with a fluoropyrimidine) as initial therapy in young (age ≤65 years) and elderly (age >65 years) patients. Additional aims included age-based comparisons of the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy, overall chemotherapy use, all-cause mortality, and toxicity-related events. Results. Overall, 520 patients (56% elderly) received 6,253 cycles of chemotherapy. Of the younger patients, 84% received doublet chemotherapy first-line, compared with 58% of elderly patients (p < .001). The use of each of the medications—irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab—was lower in elderly patients (p < .001). Independent predictors of a higher risk for mortality were age >65 (adjusted hazards ratio [HR],1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.39) and performance status score ≥2 (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.41–1.91). Conclusion. Elderly patients are less likely to receive first-line doublet chemotherapy than younger patients. Age and performance status are independent predictors of treatment and overall survival.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.297 · 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