MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

C-reactive protein as a prognostic factor in advanced urothelial carcinoma receiving chemotherapy or immunotherapy.

2018· article· en· W2793199699 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Zhao, Gregory R. Pond, Gurudatta Naik, Xiao X. Wei, Bradley A. McGregor, Guru Sonpavde

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineChemotherapyPerformance statusProportional hazards modelOncologyGastroenterologyDiscontinuationC-reactive proteinLactate dehydrogenaseInflammation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

436 Background: Clinical prognostic factors have been reported for patients receiving systemic chemotherapy. We hypothesized that markers of tissue damage and inflammation may be prognostic. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the prognostic impact of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with metastatic UC. Methods: We collected data for patients with metastatic UC receiving systemic therapy and measured serum LDH and CRP at baseline before initiating therapy. The variables collected were recognized clinical prognostic factors (performance status [PS], visceral metastasis, hemoglobin, albumin) and outcomes (time to failure [TTF], overall survival [OS]). TTF was defined as time from initiation of therapy to discontinuation of agent for any reason. LDH and CRP were evaluated on a log-continuous scale. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate times to events. Cox proportional hazards regression and logistic regression were used to study the association of factors with TTF and OS. All tests were 2-sided and significance was defined as p≤0.05. Results: A total of 36 patients were available with a median age of 74 years. The systemic therapy was platinum-based chemotherapy in 18 patients (50%), PD1/PD-L1 inhibitor in 8 patients (22.2%) and the remaining received other agents (taxane or investigational). Twenty-nine (80.5%) had PS 0-1, 13 (36.1%) had visceral metastasis and 16 (44.4%) had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy. A total of 31 patients were evaluable for this analysis with 5 inevaluable due to missing data or inadequate follow-up. On multivariable analyses, only CRP was associated with TTF (HR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.10, 2.20], p = 0.013) and OS (HR 1.77 [95% CI1.10, 2.85], p = 0.018). The limitations of a small dataset and retrospective analysis apply. Conclusions: In patient with advanced UC receiving systemic chemotherapy or PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line or salvage therapy, CRP was significantly prognostic for both TTF and OS, while other factors were not. Given the potentially powerful prognostic impact of CRP, investigation in larger datasets is warranted to enable better prognostic stratification.

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)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.368 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→