MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163787988 · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.09.5570

Adjuvant Vinorelbine and Cisplatin in Elderly Patients: National Cancer Institute of Canada and Intergroup Study JBR.10

2007· article· en· W2163787988 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carmela Pepe, Baktiar Hasan, Timothy Winton, Lesley Seymour, Barbara Graham, Robert B. Livingston, David H. Johnson, James R. Rigas, Keyue Ding, Frances A. Shepherd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVinorelbineMedicineInternal medicineChemotherapyHazard ratioCisplatinCancerOncologyClinical trialAdjuvantSurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Recent trials have shown significant survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Whether elderly patients tolerate platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy and derive the same survival advantage is unknown. This retrospective study evaluated the influence of age on survival, adjuvant chemotherapy delivery, and toxicity in National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group study JBR.10. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pretreatment characteristics and survival were compared for 327 young (< or = 65 years) and 155 elderly (> 65 years) patients. Chemotherapy delivery and toxicity were compared for 213 treated patients (63 elderly, 150 young). RESULTS: Baseline demographics by age were similar with the exception of histology (adenocarcinoma: 58% young, 43% elderly; squamous: 32% young, 49% elderly; P = .001) and performance status (PS; PS 0: 53% young, 41% elderly; P = .01). Chemotherapy significantly prolonged overall survival for elderly patients (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.98; P = .04). This benefit is similar to the effect for all patients in JBR.10. Mean dose-intensities of vinorelbine and cisplatin were 13.2 and 18.0 mg/m2/wk in young, respectively, and 9.9 and 14.1 mg/m2/wk in elderly patients (vinorelbine, P = .0004; cisplatin, P = .001), respectively. The elderly received significantly fewer doses of vinorelbine (P = .014) and cisplatin (P = .006). Fewer elderly patients completed treatment and more refused treatment (P = .03). There were no significant differences in toxicities, hospitalization, or treatment-related death by age group. Fifteen (11.9%) of 126 deaths in the young resulted from nonmalignant causes, and 15 (21.1%) of 71 in the elderly (P = .13). CONCLUSION: Despite elderly patients' receiving less chemotherapy, adjuvant vinorelbine and cisplatin improves survival in patients older than 65 years with acceptable toxicity. Adjuvant chemotherapy should not be withheld from elderly patients.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Citations219
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207