MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234031914

Potential of Amifostine for Chemoradiotherapy and Radiotherapy-associated Toxicity Reduction in Advanced NSCLC: A Meta-Analysis.

2016· article· en· W2234031914 on OpenAlexaff
Annemarie Devine, Laure Marignol

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmifostineMedicineToxicityInternal medicineConfidence intervalChemoradiotherapyRadiation therapyPulmonary toxicityAcute toxicityOncologyGastroenterologyRelative riskSurgeryUrology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: The addition of amifostine to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or radiotherapy (RT) in advanced, inoperable NSCLC presents varying toxicity. The present study examined amifostine's effect on toxicity and efficacy of CRT or RT alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Database searches yielded 16 eligible trials comprising of 1,057 patients. Results of randomised trials were pooled and used to estimate the overall effect. RESULTS: Amifostine reduced the risk of >grade 2 acute oesophagitis by 26% [risk ratio (RR), 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.65-0.86; p<0.0001] and the risk of acute pulmonary toxicity by 44% (RR, 0.56; 95%CI=0.41-0.75; p=0.0001). Risk of complete response was unchanged (RR, 1.64; 95%CI=0.99-2.73; p=0.06), partial response was unchanged (RR, 0.92; 95% CI=0.73-1.16; p=0.48). Statistical heterogeneity was high for toxicity but low for response. CONCLUSION: Statistical heterogeneity of retrived results casts doubt over amifostine's efficacy in this setting, despite decreased acute oesophageal and pulmonary toxicity. Amifostine did not compromise treatment efficacy.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207