MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neurocognitive function testing and health related quality of life in stage IV lung cancer patients with and without brain metastases.

2017· article· en· W2739368227 on OpenAlexaff
Grainne M. O’Kane, Brandon Tse, Vivian Tam, M. Catherine Brown, Lin Lü, Michael Borean, Tiffany Tse, Catherine Labbé, Hiten Naik, Nicole Mittman, Emily Tam, Mark Doherty, Natasha B. Leighl, Penelope Ann Bradbury, Frances A. Shepherd, Doris Howell, Geoffrey Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurocognitiveLung cancerInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Stage (stratigraphy)OncologyCancerGastroenterologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2073 Background: Survival in stage IV lung cancer (S4LC) patients (pts) continues to improve, highlighting the importance of assessing health related quality of life (HRQoL). Lung cancer, involvement with brain metastases (BM), and systemic or brain-specific treatment can all impact neurocognitive function (NCF) and HRQoL. We evaluated the relationship between NCF and HRQoL in S4LC pts by BM status. Methods: S4LC pts with BM (BM+) were frequency distributionally-matched to pts without BM (NBM). NCF was measured using the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised (HVLT-R), the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) and Trail Making Tests (TMT-A/B); scores were correlated with health utility score (HUS) data from EQ5D-3L surveys (Pearson Coefficient, R). Results: BM+ (n = 54) and matched NBM (n = 40) pts had similar demographics. The overall median age was 61years; 59% were female; of 89% that were adenocarcinomas, half had EGFR/ALK alterations; mean time since diagnosis was 2.6 years; mean time since BM were diagnosed in BM+ pts was 0.5 years. Mean HUS (mHUS) were similar between groups: 0.77 for BM+ vs. 0.78 for NBM; p = 0.86. However, pts with stable BM had higher HUS than those with progressive BM (mHUS: 0.80 vs 0.69; p = 0.045). Of BM+ pts, 44% had received whole brain radiation (WBRT). Correlations of NCF and HUS specific for BM+ pts were observed for several HLVT scores, including Total Recall (TR), which was correlated with HUS in BM+ (R = 0.35, p = 0.01) but not in NBM (R = 0.04, p = 0.84) and Recognition Discrimination Index (BM+: R = 0.32, p = 0.03 vs NBM: R = 0.13, p = 0.51). In contrast, TMT-A/B NCF test results had slightly stronger associations with HUS in NBM pts. COWAT was least associated with HUS in BM+ or NBM pts. In BM+ pts treated vs untreated with WBRT, HLVT scores were better in untreated patients (TR, p < 0.0001; delayed recall, p = 0.006; retention, p = 0.089), associations not seen with either TMT-A/B or COWAT. Mutation status had no bearing on these associations. Conclusions: NCF impacts HUS in S4LC pts and should be considered in treatment planning. HVLT scores are useful to assess specifically the impact of BM and WBRT in S4LC pts, and is reflected in associations with HRQoL.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207