MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors Associated with Response to Methylphenidate in Advanced Cancer Patients

2011· article· en· W2162313743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sriram Yennurajalingam, J. Lynn Palmer, Ray Chacko, Éduardo Bruera

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Nursing ResearchNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Cancer Society
KeywordsMethylphenidateMedicineCancer-related fatigueBreast cancerCancerClinical trialInternal medicinePhysical therapyAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Learning Objectives After completing this course, the reader will be able to: Identify the specific patient characteristics associated with response to methylphenidate as treatment for cancer-related fatigue.Compare day 1 patient response to methylphenidate to day 8 response and evaluate as a predictor of long-term improvement. CME This article is available for continuing medical education credit at CME.TheOncologist.com Background. There has been increasing interest in the use of methylphenidate for cancer-related fatigue (CRF) in patients with advanced cancer. However, there is limited literature on the specific patient characteristics associated with response to methylphenidate. Our objective of this study was to identify the specific patient characteristics associated with response to methylphenidate and to compare day 1 response with day 8 response. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients in two prospective controlled clinical trials that we had conducted who had received methylphenidate for cancer-related fatigue. Baseline patient characteristics, symptoms (as assessed by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS] and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F]), and response (change in fatigue) at the end of day 1 treatment were analyzed to determine their association with response to methylphenidate on day 8. Results. A total of 82 patients with advanced cancer who received methylphenidate for CRF were included in our review. The median age was 55 years, 66% were female, 74% were white, and the most common cancer type was breast (37%). Fifty out of 82 patients (61%) responded to methylphenidate (≥7 points in FACIT-F). The intensity of baseline fatigue positively correlated with the response to methylphenidate (p < .001). Change in fatigue in response to methylphenidate was not associated with intensity of baseline depression, anxiety, drowsiness, or daily opioid dose. Better improvement of fatigue after treatment on day 1 was associated with more improvement with fatigue on day 8 as assessed by FACIT-F (p = .0004) and ESAS (p = .0001). Day 1 response as a predictor of day 8 response had a sensitivity of 0.84, a positive predictive value of 0.67, and specificity of 0.6. Conclusions. Response to methylphenidate is associated with higher baseline fatigue but not with higher baseline depression or sedation. Additionally, day 1 improvement is highly sensitive as a predictor of long-term improvement.

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)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207