MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Toxicity of high-dose interferon for high-risk melanoma in Ontario: A population-based study of health services use.

2017· article· en· W2604988164 on OpenAlexaffabout
Timothy P. Hanna, Tara Baetz, Jianfeng Xu, Qun Miao, Craig C. Earle, Yingwei Peng, Christopher M. Booth, Teresa M. Petrella, Douglas R. McKay, Paul Nguyen, Hugh Langley, Elizabeth A. Eisenhauer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchSunnybrook Health Science CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesHealth Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiscontinuationPopulationMental healthPropensity score matchingCancer registryToxicityInternal medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

31 Background: While High-Dose Interferon (HDIFN) is the sole approved adjuvant systemic treatment for melanoma in Ontario and many other jurisdictions, it is toxic, of modest benefit, and costly. We sought to assess the population-level impact of toxicity, particularly neuro-psychiatric toxicity. This can inform value assessment for the adjuvant treatment of melanoma. Methods: This was a retrospective population-based registry study of all patients with melanoma receiving adjuvant HDIFN in Ontario 2008-2012. HDIFN receipt was determined from provincial drug-funding data. Toxicity was investigated through health services use compatible with HDIFN toxicity (e.g. mental health physician billings). Associations between early HDIFN discontinuation and health services use were examined. Using stage data reported from cancer centers on a subset of patients, propensity matched analysis compared utilization in stage IIB-IIIC patients that did and did not receive HDIFN. Results: Of 718 patients receiving HDIFN, 12% were ≥65 years, 83% had little or no comorbidity. One third had ≥1 toxicity-associated utilization within one year of starting HDIFN. 364/420 (87%) of utilization was mental health-related: 54% were family practitioner visits, 39% psychiatrist visits. Early drug discontinuation was more likely with pre-existing mental health issues in multivariable analysis (OR 2.0 (1.1,3.4)). In propensity matched analysis, HDIFN patients were more likely than untreated matched controls to have mental health utilization (51% vs. 42%, p=0.01) between 1 year pre-melanoma diagnosis to 2 years post. Conclusions: Mental health services use is common among stage IIB-IIIC patients with melanoma, especially with HDIFN. This emphasizes an important survivorship issue for these patients, and for those receiving HDIFN, and impacts the value of care. Pre-treatment mental health services use is associated with treatment discontinuation. This is important when contemplating the value of HDIFN use for individual patients. For those receiving HDIFN, optimal support must include mental health care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.558
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.008 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→