MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508131533 · doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(16)33573-3

174: Patient-Family Feedback on Consultation for New Diagnosis of Brain Metastases: Value of Team Approach to Care

2016· article· en· W2508131533 on OpenAlexaff
Hellen Jung, Karen Kirnbauer, Lyle Galloway, Wilson Miranda, Marc Kerba, Robert Nordal, Jon-Paul Voroney, Jashin J. Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiotherapy and Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)MedicinePatient careMedical physicsNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To describe the case mix, intervention efficacy and prognosis of patients with advanced lung cancer attending a Fast Track Lung (FTL) clinic that was established to improve timeliness of access to palliative RT.Methods and Materials: Pre-treatment and treatment information was prospectively collected on FTL patients seen from January 2014 to December 2015.Palliative RT use was decided based on clinical/radiologic information suggesting that one or more specific symptoms were reasonably likely to be helped.Phone follow up by a nurse 1-2 months later assessed the effect of RT on each index symptom.Results: Two hundred and fourteen patients were assessed a total of 310 times, a mean of 1.5 times per patient (range 1-8).Eighty-six percent had non-small cell histologies (71% adenocarcinoma, 22% squamous cell carcinoma).Most were ECOG 2 (30%) or 3 (46%) at the time of first presentation.Median survival from initial FTL consult was 3.2 months (95% CI 2.2 -3.6) for the entire group; for ECOG 0 -1, it was 12.3 months (95% CI 7.4 -16.2) and for ECOG 3 -4, 1.8 months (95% CI 1.5 -2.2).EGFR mutation positive patients had a median survival of 12.5 months (95% CI 4.3 -39.8).224 of the 310 clinic visits resulted in palliative RT to at least one site, of which 161 (72%) had phone follow up.Three hundred and ninety courses of RT were delivered, a mean of 1.8 per patient, (range 0 -13).Forty-nine percent of RT courses were delivered to bony sites other than ribs, 22% to the chest, 14% to the chest wall/ribs and 10% to the brain.Thirty-once percent were single fractions and 92% were < 5 fractions.Median dose was 20 Gy and the median number of fractions was 5.Among patients receiving RT to one or more concurrent site(s), 80% reported some benefit.Seventy-seven percent of patients receiving RT to the chest reported improvement in at least one index symptom.This varied by symptom (e.g.dysphagia 33%, cough 82%, hemoptysis 100%).Eighty percent of treated bone mets became less painful.If one assumes that every patient without follow up information had no benefit, still 59% were helped.Conclusions: Palliative RT, generally with 5 or fewer fractions, helped most patients with clinically or radiologically targetable symptoms who attended a dedicated Fast Track Lung clinic.Phone follow up is a feasible way to obtain patient or family reported outcome information.Median survival was short, although considerably longer in patients with good performance status and/or an EGFR mutation, in whom the potential benefits of more intensified palliative RT should be investigated.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRadiotherapy and OncologySame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207