MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on short-term outcomes in breast surgery: A propensity score adjusted analysis of NSQIP data.

2015· article· en· W2468271251 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Cordeiro, Angel Arnaout, Tulin Cil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePropensity score matchingBreast cancerConfoundingLogistic regressionOdds ratioSurgeryNeoadjuvant therapyCohortCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

115 Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether administration of NAC increased the proportion of overall 30-day post-operative complications among patients undergoing surgery for invasive breast cancer. Methods: An analysis of the American College of Surgeons, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) participant user files from 2005-2012 was performed. Patients undergoing surgery for invasive breast cancer were included; those with high-risk comorbidities or concurrent surgery were excluded. The primary outcome was a composite of overall 30-day post-operative complications. A propensity score was calculated and a propensity score adjusted multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine the independent effect of NAC on overall 30-day complications. Results: In the study period67,685 patients having surgery for invasive breast cancer were identified; of those, 3,624 (5.5%) received NAC. The rate of NAC use within this cohort increased from 5.5% to 10.2%. Patients who received NAC were: younger and had fewer medical comorbidities, but, were more likely to receive neoadjuvant radiation and undergo bilateral surgery. On unadjusted analysis, patients receiving NAC had significantly more post-operative complications than those not receiving NAC (4.9% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.0003) mainly due to infection and bleeding. However, after adjusting for confounders by propensity score adjusted multivariable regression, there was no longer a significant difference in overall 30-day post-operative complications between those receiving NAC versus not (odds ratio 1.16 [95%CI: 0.98, 1.36]). Conclusions: This is the largest study to examine the effect of NAC on post-operative complications in patients undergoing surgery for invasive breast cancer. The receipt of NAC does not impart a significantly increased risk of post-operative complications in this patient population.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→