Improved compliance with adjuvant vinorelbine and cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Poor compliance has been a common feature in clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for NSCLC with only 48% to 69% of patients completing all planned cycles. We retrospectively evaluated compliance and toxicity of platinum-based chemotherapy in the 2 years following recent reports of successful adjuvant chemotherapy trials for NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy after complete resection of NSCLC between May 2003 and May 2005 were analyzed retrospectively. Patient demographics, ECOG status, stage, pathologic subtype and type of surgery were recorded. The number of chemotherapy cycles, delays, dose reductions and change of chemotherapy were reported. RESULTS: Fifty patients were identified. The median age was 62 years (38% stage I, 18% stage II, 30% stage III and 14% had multiple primary tumors of variable stages). Twenty percent were ECOG PS2; Only 12% had undergone pnemonectomy. Forty-one patients (82%) started cisplatin/vinorelbine (three switched to carboplatin because of nephrotoxicity, and one switched to carboplatin/paclitaxel because of fatigue and vomiting). Three patients received other cisplatin-based combinations; six received carboplatin-based treatment (one each because of advanced age and cardiac dysfunction and 4 because of preexisting neuropathy). Eighty percent completed all treatment; 40% required a dose reduction and 58% required delays in treatment. Six events of febrile neutropenia were reported in 5 patients and 5 patients required admission for toxicity. There were no toxic deaths. Multivariate analysis showed no effect of age, gender, extent of surgery or ECOG status on compliance, need for treatment modification or toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to historical trials, adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy for resected NSCLC is now accepted by patients and physicians with a high degree of compliance.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".