Prospective evaluation of quality of life (QOL) during a phase I/II study of adjuvant chemotherapy with image-guided high-precision radiotherapy for completely resected gastric cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
164 Background: Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy improves overall and relapse free survival in patients with completely resected gastric cancer, but confers toxicity. This prospective phase I/II clinical trial assessed the toxicity, efficacy and QOL when adding bi-weekly cisplatin to adjuvant chemoradiotherapy with infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Phase I data showed promising outcomes with acceptable toxicity. Methods: Treatment comprised 45 Gy in 25 fractions of image-guided 3D-CRT or IMRT concurrently with weeks 3-7 of 12 weeks of infusional 5-FU. Cisplatin (up to bi-weekly) was added in a standard dose-escalation protocol. Patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, end of radiotherapy, 4 weeks post chemotherapy and at 1 and 2 years. Results: Among 55 participants (mean age 54, range 28 to 77; 55% male; median follow-up 3.03 years), QOL compliance ranged from 93% at baseline to 70% at 4 weeks post-treatment. Maximal tolerable dose of cisplatin was 40 mg/m2 bi-weekly for 4 cycles. OS and DFS rates are 85% and 74% respectively at 2 years. Mean scores for global QOL (median difference = -25, p < 0.0001), role and social functioning, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and appetite declined at completion of radiation; physical functioning showed a statistically significant decline of borderline clinical importance (median difference = -6.7, p <.0001). All scales recovered by 4 weeks after chemotherapy except fatigue, which returned to baseline by one year. Conclusions: Adjuvant gastric chemoradiotherapy incorporating cisplatin worsened global QOL, fatigue, nausea and vomiting and appetite. Most scales recovered by 4 weeks post-chemotherapy. This regimen is tolerable not only by observer rated toxicity, but also by patient reported QOL measures. Clinical trial information: NCT00188266.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".