Dose intensity and survival outcomes with adjuvant FOLFOX for colon cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
423 Background: Adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy for resected high-risk colon cancer is associated with a low risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Nonetheless, neutropenia is a common cause of dose modification or delay with unknown consequences on outcomes. We examined the effect of neutropenia-related and other dose limiting toxicities (DLT), relative dose intensity (RDI) of oxaliplatin and 5-FU, on relapse-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy for resected high-risk colon cancer. Methods: A chart review was conducted on patients treated at the British Columbia Cancer Agency with ≥ 1 cycle of FOLFOX chemotherapy for resected stage II or III colon cancer between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2007. RFS and OS were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models. Results: 114 patients (median age 59.2 years, 43.8% male, 98% stage III, median follow-up 5.2 years) were included. 90% of patients experienced any DLT, while 58% of patients had a neutropenia related DLT. There were no documented episodes of FN. G-CSF was used in 9.6% of patients. Median RDI was 81% and 85% for oxaliplatin and 5-FU, respectively. Oxaliplatin and 5-FU RDI were not associated with RFS or OS when analyzed as continuous variable or categorically (Table). Conclusions: DLTs affect the majority of patients on adjuvant FOLFOX for high-risk colon cancer, but RFS and OS do not appear to be affected by the associated lower RDI of oxaliplatin and 5-FU. [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 | 0.000 |
| 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".