157: A Phase II Trial Measuring the Integration of Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) Plus Surgery in Operable Patients with Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (Missile-NSCLC): Interim Safety Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
item EORTC QLQ-C30, its corresponding 13-item lung cancer supplement, and the EuroQol disease-generic questionnaire.Indirect costs of productivity loss were evaluated using the short form health and labor questionnaire, which includes work absences, reduced efficiency at work, and substitution for unpaid work.Time to deterioration (TTD) in HRQOL was calculated from time to randomization to first appearance of clinically significant change.TTD was analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models.The Embase and MEDLINE databases were systematically reviewed to obtain English language articles investigating patient-reported HRQOL after SABR for ES-NSCLC up to August 1, 2015.Review articles, meta-analyses and decision analyses were excluded.Relevant data regarding patient characteristics and study outcomes were abstracted and analyzed.Results: In the ROSEL study, only TTD of global health status was significantly worse on univariable modeling for surgical patients compared to SABR (HR 0.19, p = 0.038).Indirect costing analysis revealed lower total productivity costs to society for SABR compared to surgery (€95 versus and €3,513, p = 0.044).Patients reported a lower total degree of hindrance in paid and unpaid work for SABR compared to surgery (mean hindrance scores for SABR: 1.9, for surgery: 6.0, p = 0.010).In the systematic review, nine out of 204 potential studies met all inclusion criteria and were analyzed.All studies were prospective in design.Overall SABR appeared to be welltolerated, in a mostly medically inoperable patient population.Clinically and statistically significant deteriorations in fatigue and dyspnea were individually reported in two studies.An isolated report found clinically and statistically significant improvements in emotional functioning over time.Deterioration in dyspnea and physical functioning were noted in other studies, but were neither statistically nor clinically significant.Conclusions: SABR is an overall well-tolerated modality in patients with ES-NSCLC who either declined surgery or were unfit.Exploratory results in operable ES-NSCLC suggest that SABR may be better tolerated than surgery and incur indirect costing savings.Future clinical trials comparing SABR and surgery would benefit from the inclusion of HRQOL metrics in study design.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".