Thrombocytosis as a predictor of poor prognosis in colorectal cancer patients.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
540 Background: Thrombocytosis has been identified as a prognostic factor in many cancer types including ovarian, breast, and lung cancers. In colorectal cancer (CRC), the literature is divided. Several smaller case studies suggest a negative prognosis in CRC patients with pre-operative thrombocytosis, a larger population study contradicts this. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of CRC patients treated at the Cancer Center of Southeastern Ontario diagnosed from January 2005 to December 2011. 1304 confirmed CRC patient charts were identified and patient, tumor, blood work and treatment variables were extracted. Results: 1,096 patients had platelet count available at the time of oncology consult. 222 (20.3%) were characterized as having thrombocytosis (>400x109/L). No difference was identified between those with normal and with thrombocytosis with regards to age, sex, comorbidities, and BMI. However, a statistically significant difference was identified when looking at several pathological characteristics. Significantly more patients with thrombocytosis presented with stage 4 disease (p<0.0001). Additionally less early T-stage (T1: p<0.05, T2: p<0.001), lymph node positivity (p<0.05) and LVI (p<0.05) was identified. Univariate analysis identified a significant difference in survival (1yr: 71.6% vs 88.1%, p<0.0001; 2 yr: 58.1% vs 78.1%, p<0.0001; 5yr: 48.2% vs 64.7%, p<0.0001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis, identified a statistically significant effect of thrombocytosis on risk of dying (HR=1.434, C.I 1.153-1.784, p=0.001). A survival difference was primarily identified in the Stage 4 population (1yr: 55.8% with thrombocytosis vs 72.9% with normal platelet count, p=0.0058; 2 yr: 36.0% vs 50.2%, p=0.0388; 5yr: 26.7% vs 32.0%, p=0.4042). There were no differences in the number of metastatic sites or the number of days on chemotherapy to account for the survival difference. Conclusions: Thrombocytosis, at the time of oncology consultation appears to predict a lower chance of survival in CRC patients, especially in the stage 4 population. Further work is required to elucidate the mechanism of action between elevated platelet counts and survival.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".