MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predicting toxicities from adjuvant treatment in a population-based cohort of early colon cancer (CC) patients (pts): A strategy to improve use of curative chemotherapy.

2014· article· en· W2589723661 on OpenAlexaff
Gillian Gresham, Jasleen Sidhu, Navraj Malhi, Winson Y. Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFOLFOXInternal medicineChemotherapyCancerColorectal cancerPopulationCohortOncologyGastroenterologySurgeryOxaliplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

412 Background: CC pts treated with chemotherapy are at risk of experiencing a number of toxicities. The identification of pts who may be at a higher risk of developing toxicities allows clinicians to be more vigilant in preventing and managing side effects early, thus enabling more optimal delivery of chemotherapy. Our aim was to determine clinical factors associated with toxicities from adjuvant FOLFOX in early CC. Methods: Pts diagnosed with stage III CC from 2005 to 2008, seen at any 1 of 5 regional cancer centers of the British Columbia Cancer Agency, and treated with adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy were reviewed. We evaluated various toxicities, including gastrointestinal, hematologic, cardiovascular, and neurological side effects. Baseline and clinical factors were assessed in univariate and multivariate models to determine potential predictors for each of the different chemotherapy toxicities. Results: In total, 475 pts were included: median age was 62 years (range 26-89), 16.2% were aged >70 years, and 54.5% were men. In terms of function, the majority (90.1%) was ECOG 0/1. Time to adjuvant chemotherapy (TTAC) >8 weeks (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.8-3.1, p=0.006) and renal dysfunction with a GFR <50 (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.1-2.6, p=0.0038) were significantly associated with higher odds of any GI toxicity. Likewise, TTAC >8weeks (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5-5.2, p=0.002), ECOG PS >1 (OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.2-6.7, p=0.016), and low white blood cell count <6.4 (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.3-4.0, p=0.0043) were correlated with a greater risk of significant neutropenia. Multiple toxicities were more prevalent among those who waited >8 weeks to initiate adjuvant FOLFOX (OR 1.69, 95%CI 1.1-2.7, p=0.03). Further, advanced age >70 years was an indepenent risk factor for worse nausea and diarrhea. Conclusions: Consideration of important baseline characteristics such as TTAC, advanced age, renal function, and specific laboratory parameters when recommending adjuvant FOLFOX can be useful in identifying patients with increased likelihood of toxicities. This group of patients may benefit from increased monitoring in order to enable optimal doses of curative chemotherapy to be delivered.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207