MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332844714 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000000198

Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX Application in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

2014· article· en· W2332844714 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Paniccia, Barish H. Edil, Richard D. Schulick, Joshua T. Byers, Cheryl Meguid, Csaba Gajdos, Martin D. McCarter

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsPancreas Centre (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFOLFIRINOXMedicineIrinotecanOxaliplatinNeoadjuvant therapySurgeryConcomitantAdenocarcinomaRadiologyInternal medicineColorectal cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5-Fluorouracile, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) has not been extensively used in the neoadjuvant setting because of concerns with safety and toxicity. We evaluated our institutional experience with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (BRPAC). The primary endpoints were completion of therapy to surgery and negative resection margin (R0) rate. Patients with BRPAC treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX were retrospectively analyzed. Between August 2011 and September 2013, 20 patients with BRPAC treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX were identified. Most patients (88.8%) completed FOLFIRINOX therapy and underwent resection. Abutment of venous structures was identified in 13 cases (72.2%), while short segment portal vein encasement in 3 cases (16.6%) with concomitant arterial involvement in 3 cases (16.6%). Isolated superior mesenteric artery abutment was identified in 2 cases (11.2%). Patients received a median of 4 cycles of FOLFIRINOX. There was 1 case of progression. Vascular resection was performed in 9 cases (52.9%). Preoperative radiation therapy was used in 8 patients (44%). All patients underwent margin negative resection (R0). Histopathologic treatment response was evident in 10 cases (58.8%). Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was generally safe and the expected toxicity did not prevent surgery allowing for a high rate of R0 resection.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations60
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207