MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Do most newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC patients need nutritional intervention?

2007· article· en· W2530057534 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nelda Swinton, Goulnar Kasymjanova, Tracy Steinberg, L. Lajeunesse, Esther Dajczman, Harvey Kreisman, David Small, Jason Agulnik, J. Kawadoi, Neil Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWeight lossInternal medicineMalnutritionCancerLung cancerConstipationPhysical therapyObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9108 Background: Depletion of nutritional reserves and significant weight loss are commonly noted in patients (pts) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a nutritional screening tool for cancer pts, recommended by the Oncology Network of Dietitians of Canada and the American Dietetic Association. The PG-SGA categorizes total scores into 4 ranges for nutritional triage: 0–1 requires no intervention, 2–3 requires education, 4 - 8 requires intervention by a dietitian, and =9 requires urgent symptom control and nutrition intervention. (Ottery, 2000). Methods: We determined the prevalence of malnutrition in 92 newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC pts (stages 3 / 4) in an outpatient clinic who had completed a baseline PG-SGA. We also investigated the association between CRP (an inflammatory marker which correlates with poor prognosis) and the PG-SGA. PG-SGA score was based on the sum of 4 subscales: symptoms, weight history, food intake and functional status. Results: 92 pts (M 48, F 44) aged 65 ±11 years were studied. 21 (23%) pts had a PG-SGA score of 0–3, 23 (25%) 4–8, and 48 (52%) of 9 or greater. The most common symptoms accounting for a high PG-SGA score were: no appetite 37 (40%), pain 27 (29%), constipation 26 (28%), feeling full 24 (26%), dry mouth 22 (24%) and taste changes 19 (21%). 51 (55%) pts lost 0–4.9% of their body weight in the past month, 17 (19%) had a weight loss of 5–9.9% and 24 (26%) had a weight loss =10 %. In pts with a PG-SGA score of 0–3 the median CRP was 7.0 mg/L (range: 0.7–66.0), in those with a score of 4–8 the median CRP was 41.8 mg/L (0.8–266.1) and in those with a score of =9 the median CRP was 18.5 mg/L (0.3–219.0) (p=0.02). Conclusion: At time of diagnosis, 77% of advanced NSCLC pts were in need of nutritional intervention; 52% required urgent intervention. The PG-SGA is a simple screening tool which should be incorporated into patient care in outpatient oncology clinics. 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.406 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→