MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Reasons for delay in time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: A multi-institution study.

2014· article· en· W2598049994 on OpenAlexaffabout
James Biagi, Ronald L. Burkes, Christine B. Brezden, Kevin Zbuk, Brandon M. Meyers, Oren Levine, Silvana Spadafora, Stephen Welch, Sukaina Davdani, Wilma M. Hopman, Christopher M. Booth, Rachel Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalQueen's UniversityCancer Care OntarioSunnybrook Health Science CentreJuravinski Cancer CentreEssar Steel Algoma (Canada)Group Health CentreSt. Michael's HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerColorectal cancerInternal medicineCohortChemotherapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e14504 Background: Although adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) has been shown to improve survival in patients with colon cancer (CC), meta-analyses have suggested decreased survival with increasing Time To AC (TTAC). We examined the predominant factors leading to delayed TTAC in routine clinical practice. Methods: Individual medical records were reviewed for 1,608 patients with CC who initiated AC 2005-2012 at eight cancer centers in the Province of Ontario. Patient, disease, and treatment characteristics, plus time intervals between each step in the cancer care pathway from surgery to AC, were captured. Patients were then categorized into three groups for comparison: (I) inter-current illness and/or post-operative complications, (II) oncologist/patient-initiated delay, (III) no medical reason for delay. Groups were compared using chi square tests and one-way ANOVA. A multivariate logistic regression analysis (MVA) was used to determine factors associated with TTAC >8 weeks (wks) for each cohort. Results: The proportion of patients in each group was: (I) 24.7%, (II) 19.5%, (III) 55.8%; mean TTAC was: (I) 10.1±2.7, (II) 10.5±3.6, (III) 8.5±2.1 wks (p<0.001); the proportion of cases with TTAC>8 wks was: (I) 76.4%; (II) 81.4%; (III) 57.9%. The most common post-operative complication in Group I was ileus (34.2%). The only significant predictor of TTAC >8 wks by MVA in group I was AC via central venous catheter (OR=2.4, 95%, CI:1.2-4.9). Median length of stay in hospital after surgery was 10, 6 and 6 days for Group I, II, and III, respectively (p<0.001). When MVA was performed on all patients, the presence of post-operative complications (OR=2.4, 95%CI:1.6-3.8) and oncologist/patient-initiated delay (OR=3.5, 95%CI:2.1-6.0) were the strongest predictors of delay. There was no effect on TTAC if surgery was performed in peripheral versus academic hospital (p=0.32). Conclusions: Although the majority of patients had no medical reason for delay, the average TTAC was > 8 wks. Our findings suggest that health-system factors such as waiting for consultations and chemotherapy booking cause the majority of delays in TTAC. These are modifiable and quality improvement initiatives should focus on how to reduce these delays.

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)0.006
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.366 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments→French-language works237,207→