MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stage III NSCLC: How many patients are really suitable for radical treatment approaches?

2012· article· en· W2602417323 on OpenAlexaffabout
Humaid O. Al‐Shamsi, Peter Ellis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStage (stratigraphy)SurgeryRetrospective cohort studyCancerRadical surgeryPopulationCohortInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e17532 Background: Stage III NSCLC represents a heterogeneous population. Patients with good performance status (PS) and weight loss < 10% (WL<10) are generally considered for radical treatment with chemoradiation or trimodality approaches. Outcome data from Cancer Care Ontario show 30% of stage III NSCLC (6th edition TNM) patients receive chemoradiation.There is significant variation between local health networks. We examined the proportion of patients with stage III NSCLC suitable for radical treatment. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with stage III NSCLC at the Juravinski Cancer Center from July 2007 to June 2009. Demographic, pathologic and treatment data were abstracted from patients’ records. The primary outcome was the proportion of stage III NSCLC patients eligible for radical treatment. We also compared patients treated radically versus palliatively. Results: 159 stage III NSCLC patients (staged by 6th edition TNM) were seen. The median age was 69 yrs (sd 12) with 58% men and 42% women. There were 40% stage IIIA, 37% IIIB and 23% IIIB (wet). 61 (38%) patients were treated with radical intent and 98 (62%) were treated palliatively. Reasons for palliative treatment approach were WL >10% (7%), PS >2 (10% ), both WL >10% and PS >2 (20%), significant comorbidities (9%),patient declined (9%) and stage IIIB wet(23 %).The median OS for patients treated radically was 23.3 months v 7.1 months for those treated palliatively. Stage IIIA patients treated radically had better OS than IIIB (27m v 14m). Patients with poor PS, or WL>10% had similar OS to patients with wet stage IIIB (7.1m v 7.2m), whereas the survival of patients with poor PS and WL >10% was worse (3m). Conclusions: Using eligibility criteria from clinical trials of stage III NSCLC, only 40% of patients appear eligible for radical treatment approaches. Our data are consistent with published data. Significant WL>10% or poor PS (>2) predicted poor outcome. Combined WL>10% and poor PS predicted a very poor prognostic group. Criteria for radical treatment of stage III NSCLC should not be extrapolated beyond the eligibility criteria used in clinical trials.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207