Outcomes of patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (MCRC) treated with first and second line chemotherapy at a multicenter cancer clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
13529 Background: In British Columbia (BC), FOLFIRI and FOLFOX were approved for the treatment of MCRC in 2002. The effect on survival of various treatment and patient related factors was determined for patients with MCRC treated with sequential doublet chemotherapy. Methods: Eligible patients received either FOLFOX or FOLFIRI first-line with a cross over to the alternative regimen for second-line therapy. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed for patient and disease characteristics, treatment, toxicity and survival. Analysis of survival was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Between March 2002 and June 2004, 106 new patients met the criteria above. Sixty five patients were treated with a sequence of FOLFOX-FOLFIRI (Group A): 67% M, median age 57y, rectal 20%. Forty-one were treated with the sequence FOLFIRI-FOLFOX (Group B): 64% M, median age 58y, 27% rectal. Survival was statistically similar in both groups. Progression requiring second line chemotherapy within 4 weeks of a first line treatment was associated with inferior survival (13 months vs. 21 months (p<0.018). Grade 3 or 4 toxicity was experienced in 27.5% of the patients treated with FOLFOX and 22% of the patients treated with FOLFIRI. Conclusions: In the general population with MCRC, the median survival achieved with sequential doublet therapy is consistent with that reported in clinical trials. A superior sequence was not identified. The median number of first line chemotherapy cycles with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI was similar, reflecting the general clinical practice in BC to give 10 - 12 cycles of therapy followed by a planned break. Patients who required initiation of second line chemotherapy within 4 weeks of stopping the first line therapy experienced an inferior prognosis. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed no significance of sex, age, site (colon versus rectal), and ECOG status as predictive factors. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".