The association of baseline anxiety and depression with overall survival (OS) in colorectal cancer (CRC).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
706 Background: Patient-reported measures such as psychosocial wellbeing and quality of life have been reported to correlate with cancer survival, but the specific factors within these constructs that associate with outcomes remains poorly defined. Our aim was to examine the effect of baseline anxiety and depression on OS in a population-based cohort of CRC patients. Methods: Patients diagnosed with CRC in 2008, referred to any 1 of 5 regional cancer centers in British Columbia, and who completed a baseline questionnaire to evaluate anxiety and depression were reviewed. We developed a scoring system based on these patient-reported survey data to characterize intensity and subsequently categorized patients as having no, mild, moderate or severe anxiety and/or depression. Vital statistics were captured by medical records. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariate Cox regression models that controlled for additional socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were constructed to correlate anxiety and depression with OS. Results: A total of 449 patients were included: median age was 66 years (range 26-92), 52% were men, and 69% were white. A significant proportion of respondents reported anxiety (58%) or depression (45%) at baseline. Among them, the majority indicated their anxiety and depressive symptoms were severe (43% and 43%, respectively). Women and those who were single or unmarried were more likely to have anxiety and depression (p<0.001 and p=0.02, respectively). In unadjusted analyses, we observed a trend where increased severity of anxiety (p=0.07) and depression (p=0.04) correlated with worse outcomes. In Cox regression that considered other prognostic factors, however, this observation failed to persist, and neither anxiety nor depression associated with OS (Table). Conclusions: The impact of psychosocial wellbeing and quality of life on CRC outcomes that have been previously described in the literature are unlikely to be mediated through baseline anxiety or depression. [Table: see text]
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".