MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thrombotic events in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab.

2013· article· en· W2265676821 on OpenAlexaff
Humaid O. Al‐Shamsi, Mahraz Anjum, Abdulaziz Al Farsi, Hua Shen, Lori‐Ann Linkins, Richard J. Cook, Pierre Major

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBevacizumabMedicineFOLFIRIInternal medicineColorectal cancerPopulationOncologySurgeryMultivariate analysisGastroenterologyChemotherapyCancerIrinotecan

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

540 Background: The rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in (mCRC) with bevacizumab was reported in a meta-analysis as 19.1%. We estimated and compared the rate of VTE among mCRC patients receiving FOLFIRI and bevacizumab with patients receiving FOLFIRI without bevacizumab. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study assessing the rate of VTE in a group of 450 mCRC patients seen consecutively at the Juravinski Cancer Center. Patients were classified according to their treatment: chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (n=261) and control group (n=189) who received only FOLFIRI during the years 2004 to 2012. Demographic, pathologic and treatment data were abstracted. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for the effect potential confounding variables associated with treatment and VTE and to assess the effect of these variables risk of VTEs in this population. The primary end point was the occurrence of a VTE. Secondary analyses involved classifying site of VTE. Results: The percentage of male, mean age and mean BMI were 64.8%, 60.1 years and 27.2 for the bevacizumab group and 61.9%, 63.69 years and 27.6 are for the control group. The crude incidence of VTEs was 13.1% in bevacizumab and 10.5% in the control groups (p = NS). Multivariate analysis controlled for age, BMI, gender, malignancy, metastatic disease and line of treatment did not suggest a significant increase in risk of VTE associated with bevacizumab (OR=0.83 95% CI: 0.40, 1.70; p=0.602). The only significant factor for thrombosis in bevacizumab group was BMI (OR=1.05; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.10; p=0.016). Other risk factors such as previous VTE, stroke, smoking, and hypertension were not statistically significant when assessed through a composite covariate. For anatomical location of VTEs, see the Table. Conclusions:The rate of VTEs overall was lower in our sample than has been reported in previous studies. We excluded upper limb DVTs associated with central lines which may explain the lower VTEs overall. The incidence of VTEs was not significantly different between the bevacizumab and the control groups. bevacizumab was not associated with increase risk of VTES . This support the safety of bevacizumab in regards to VTEs risk in this population. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in FOLFIRI with and without bevacizumab. [Table: see text]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207