FOLFIRINOX in the real-world setting: The multicentric experience of six Canadian institutions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
367 Background: FOLFIRINOX has emerged as a new standard for patients with performance status ECOG 0-1 in metastatic pancreatic cancer and non-randomized studies also support this regimen in locally advanced disease. This regimen is however associated with significant toxicity. The purpose of this study was to assess efficacy and toxicity outside of a clinical trial, including community hospitals. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received FOLFIRINOX between January 2011 and June 2013 in six institutions in the province of Quebec, Canada. Patients' characteristics, objective response, survival and toxicities were collected. Results: Forty-six patients were included (23 metastatic and 23 locally advanced). Median age was 59 years. Tumor was localized at the head in 65% of patients and 41 % had a biliary stent. Median overall survival was 12,6 months and survival at one year was 61% for metastatic patients. Survival at one year was 95% for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients and no one with locally advanced tumor became candidate for curative surgery after FOLFIRINOX. Hospitalization rate was 54% with sepsis being the leading cause. There were three treatment-related deaths (7%) and two of them occurred after the first cycle. Neutropenia grade ≥ 3 was observed in 33% of patients and four patients had febrile neutropenia (9 %) with 61% of patients receiving colony stimulating factors (CSFs) for primary prophylaxis. Three patients had cholangitis and diarrhea grade ≥ 3 occurred in 15% of patients. Five patients (11%) experienced transient dysarthria during Irinotecan administration. Conclusions: Survival in our cohort is comparable with data reported by previous studies. However, toxicities were significant and higher than reported. These data highlight the importance of patient selection and support the universal use of CSFs in this population.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".