Impact of reduced dose intensity of adjuvant bolus 5-FU based chemotherapy for stage 2 and 3 colon cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3664 Background: Adjuvant 5-FU based therapy (AT) improves survival for patients with resected high-risk colon cancer. The impact of AT dose intensity on outcomes has not been previously examined. Methods: Patients with resected stage 2 or 3 colon cancer who initiated 5-FU/Folinic Acid (FA) (375–425mg/m2 of 5-FU with 20mg/m2 FA for 5 consecutive days every 28 days) between June 1998 and December 1999 were identified through the BC Cancer Agency patient registry and pharmacy database. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed. Dose intensity (DI) was calculated based upon: (actual dose delivered/expected full dose) divided by (actual number of days of treatment/expected number of days of treatment). Patients were divided into two cohorts: A - Greater than 85% of planned DI received or B - Less than or equal to 85% of planned DI received. Patient characteristics and survival (by the Kaplan-Meier method) were compared in both cohorts. Results: One hundred and thirty six patients were eligible for review. Median follow-up was 59.2 months. Cohorts A and B are compared in Table 1. Patients in cohort B (reduced DI) were more likely to be older, female and have stage III disease, although these differences were not statistically significant. Overall survival between the two cohorts was similar. Conclusions: In general practice, dose reductions are common among patients receiving adjuvant bolus 5-FU/FA chemotherapy for colon cancer. However, reduced DI does not appear to adversely impact long-term survival. 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".