MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictors of early mortality in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: Results from a global prospective cohort study.

2014· article· en· W2591198891 on OpenAlexaff
Davendra Sohal, Nicole M. Kuderer, Frances A. Shepherd, Ingrid Pabinger, Giancarlo Agnelli, Howard A. Liebman, Éric Vicaut, Guy Meyer, Gary H. Lyman, Alok A. Khorana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineColorectal cancerOdds ratioProspective cohort studyRegimenBody mass indexChemotherapy regimenCohortCancerSurgeryOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

532 Background: Early mortality is a major problem in colorectal cancer and our understanding of risk factors and predictors is incomplete. A venous thromboembolism (VTE) Risk Score, comprising primary site, baseline hemoglobin, leukocyte and platelet counts, and body mass index [Khorana et al, Blood, 2008], has been shown to be associated with early mortality in solid tumors [Kuderer et al, 2008; Ay et al, 2013]. We evaluated the value of this Risk Score and other key prognostic variables in predicting early mortality for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Methods: CANTARISK was a prospective, non-interventional, global cohort study in patients with CRC and lung cancer initiating a new chemotherapy regimen. Clinical data were collected at 0, 2, 4, and 6 months. All data were compiled centrally and analyzed after the study closed. Risk score categories were as defined previously [Blood, 2008]. Statistically significant univariable associations and a priori prognostic variables were tested in multivariable models; adjusted odds ratios (OR) are presented. Results: A total of 1,789 CRC patients were enrolled from 2011-12; data on 1,533 evaluable patients are presented. Median age was 62 years; 71% were Caucasian. Geographic distribution was Europe 37%, North America 28%; Asia 23%; South America 12%. One-third (33%) had a rectal primary and 65% had metastatic disease. There were 184 deaths (10.3%) on study. For low, intermediate and high Risk Score, there were 8.1%, 11.2%, and 32.5% deaths, respectively. In multivariate analyses, the Risk Score remained an independent predictor of death (OR for high/intermediate vs. low score = 1.70, p = 0.0027), in addition to age (OR for each incremental year = 1.03, p = 0.0014), presence of metastatic disease (OR = 3.28, p < 0.0001), and ECOG performance status ≥2 (OR = 3.85, p < 0.0001). VTE itself was not associated with death. Conclusions: This prospective global cohort study demonstrates that the Risk Score is prognostic of early mortality in CRC patients, in addition to age, stage, and performance status. Intermediate or high-risk patients, as defined by the Risk Score, may benefit from additional interventions aimed at reducing early mortality.

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)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.376 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207