MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metastatic NSCLC: Treatment patterns, outcomes, and costs of newer agents.

2012· article· en· W2603415112 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adrian G. Sacher, Lisa W. Le, Anthea Lau, Craig C. Earle, Natasha B. Leighl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGemcitabineChemotherapyOncologyCancerSystemic therapyPerformance statusCisplatinBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7606 Background: New therapies for metastatic NSCLC have improved survival in clinical trials. The increased cost of these agents has led to variable drug funding and treatment across jurisdictions. Here we review patterns, real-world outcomes and costs of metastatic NSCLC treatment in the province of Ontario. Methods: All patients diagnosed with metastatic NSCLC from 2005-2009 were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry with demographic, histologic and mortality data. Treatment records from the Ontario New Drug Funding Program and centralized treatment database were linked. Statistical analysis involved Wilcoxon rank sum, Kruskal-Wallis, Cochran-Armitage trend and likelihood ratio tests where appropriate. Results: 8113 metastatic NSCLC patients were identified. The median age was 68; 39% had adenocarcinoma, 14% squamous carcinoma and 43% histology not otherwise specified. Most were treated in regional cancer centers (92%). The majority (76%) did not receive systemic therapy; 23% received first-line chemotherapy, most commonly platinum doublets. More patients received systemic therapy over time (19% in 2005 v 26% in 2009, p <0.0001). Older patients (p <0.0001) and those with squamous histology (p <0.0001) were less likely to receive systemic therapy. Center of diagnosis did not affect the likelihood of treatment (p=0.46). The median time from diagnosis to death was significantly greater among patients selected to receive chemotherapy (9.3 v 3.2 months, p <0.0001), and with cisplatin/gemcitabine compared to other doublets (10.7 v 8.2 months, p=0.004). 31% of treated patients received second-line chemotherapy, predominantly with docetaxel (52%) or pemetrexed (41%). Pemetrexed use increased significantly over time (8% in 2005 v 71% in 2009, p<0.0001), as did the mean drug cost of second-line therapy ($5939/patient in 2005 v $10,057 in 2009). A longer median survival was also seen with pemetrexed in adenocarcinoma (17.9 v 15.2 months for docetaxel, p =0.02). Conclusions: Most metastatic NSCLC patients do not undergo systemic treatment. First- and second-line treatment outcomes in this population-based study were similar to clinical trials, confirming better outcomes with new agents at greater cost.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207