MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A prognostic score for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone acetate post chemotherapy.

2014· article· en· W2591165175 on OpenAlexaff
Arnoud J. Templeton, Aurelius Omlin, Carmel Pezaro, Thian Kheoh, Raya Leibowitz‐Amit, Francisco Vera-Badillo, Ian F. Tannock, Gerhardt Attard, Eitan Amir, Johann S. de Bono

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbiraterone acetateDocetaxelInternal medicineProstate cancerProportional hazards modelHazard ratioOncologyLymph nodeCancerGastroenterologyUrologyAndrogen deprivation therapyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

70 Background: We aimed to establish a simple prognostic score for men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone following docetaxel and explored incorporation of the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a marker of host inflammation with prognostic value in many solid tumors. Methods: To develop the model, clinical and laboratory factors for 185 men treated at Royal Marsden were included in a univariable Cox regression analysis. Statistically significant variables were dichotomized using an optimal cut-off chosen by selecting the highest c-index among three potential cut-offs with high Hazard Ratios (HR). All significant variables in univariable analysis were analyzed using multivariable Cox analysis. One risk point was assigned for each variable with a P value of <0.05 in multivariable analysis and the risk points were used to establish three prognostic groups of similar prevalence. The validity of the model is being examined using the large data-set from the abiraterone registration trial (COU-AA-301). Results: Median age was 69 years, 41% had both bone and lymph node metastases (BLN), 15% had visceral disease. Involvement of BLN or visceral disease (HR 1.6, P=0.013), ALP >2.0 x ULN (HR 1.7, P=0.005), LDH >1.5 x ULN (HR 3.4, P<0.001), Hgb <12 g/dL (HR 2.1, P<0.001), and NLR >5 (HR 1.5, P=0.033) were associated with worse OS in the multivariable analysis. Outcomes for three risk groups using these 5 factors are presented in the table. The c-index was 0.73 (95% CI 0.65 - 0.80) for the prognostic score. Patients with NLR >5 at baseline and whose NLR was ≤5 within four weeks of treatment also had longer median survival (15.1 months) than those with NLR >5 at baseline that remained high (median OS 7.6 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25-0.93, P=0.029). Conclusions: This initial simple risk score provides good prognostic and discriminatory accuracy for men with mCRPC. Data from the validation cohort will be presented. [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 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→