MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Oxaliplatin associated neurotoxicity outcomes among older adults with colorectal cancer: A population-based study.

2016· article· en· W2590373457 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael J. Raphael, Hadas D. Fischer, Kinwah Fung, Peter C. Austin, Christopher M. Booth, Geoffrey M. Anderson, Simron Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreWomen's College HospitalQueen's UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxaliplatinMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineColorectal cancerCohortRegimenCancer registryPopulationIncidence (geometry)CancerSurgeryOncologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

601 Background: The addition of oxaliplatin to fluorouracil-based regimens in the adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to improve overall survival at the expense of increased toxicity. Toxicity may be higher among older patients who may also derive less benefit from oxaliplatin. The incidence of toxicity in the elderly is unknown. Methods: A cohort of patients ≥ 66 years old diagnosed with Stage II and III CRC between 2007 and 2011 in Ontario, Canada was identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry. Linked administrative databases were used to identify patients treated with oxaliplatin who were subsequently diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy (PN) or received a new prescription for a neuropathic pain medication. Patients were stratified into two age strata, ages 66-69 and ages ≥ 70, and each group was compared to a control cohort receiving non-oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). Cause-specific hazard models were used to estimate the effect of Oxaliplatin exposure on the cause-specific hazard of PN and associated neurotoxicity outcomes after accounting for the competing risk of death. Results: We identified 3,607 patients aged ≥ 66 with Stage II and III CRC, of whom 1,541 were treated with an oxaliplatin-based AC regimen. Compared to control subjects receiving non-oxaliplatin based AC, patients ≥ 70 years old treated with oxaliplatin were more likely to be diagnosed with PN (cause-specific hazard ratio (CHR) age ≥ 70, 2.07 [95% CI, 1.43-3.00; p < 0.001]) and receive a new prescription for a neuropathic pain medication (CHR age ≥ 70, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.43-2.42;p < 0.001]). In patients aged 66-69, oxaliplatin use was not associated with a new diagnosis of PN (p = 0.903), but was associated with an increased likelihood of receiving a prescription for a neuropathic pain medication (CHR age 66-70, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.22-3.03; p = 0.005]). By the end of one year, the cumulative incidence of PN was 3.21% (95% CI, 2.02-4.81) for ages 66-69 and 5.51% (95% CI, 4.14-7.15) for age ≥ 70. Conclusions: In this population-based cohort of CRC patients ≥ 70 years old, treatment with oxaliplatin is associated with a significant risk of developing PN and requiring treatment with neuropathic pain medications.

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)0.001
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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.398 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology→French-language works237,207→