MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The impact of lung and bone metastases on prognosis in advanced PDAC.

2018· article· en· W2795538731 on OpenAlexaff
Grainne M. O’Kane, Adriana Fraser, Stephanie Moignard, Anna Dodd, Sean Creighton, Hao‐Wen Sim, Kyaw Aung, Ayelet Borgida, Steven Gallinger, Jennifer J. Knox

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineProportional hazards modelCohortAdenocarcinomaOncologyLungRetrospective cohort studyStage (stratigraphy)DiseaseGastroenterologySurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

494 Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly fatal disease inherently resistant to cytotoxic treatment. Despite the prevalence of liver and peritoneal metastases, subsets of patients also develop lung and bone metastases highlighting phenotypic heterogeneity. We reviewed the prognostic implications of metastatic sites on survival. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients with PDAC who received surgical or oncological treatment at the University Health Network from September 2012 until December 2016. Clinical and pathological variables were obtained from patient electronic records. Radiological images and pathology reports were reviewed to ascertain sites of metastatic disease. The Kaplan-Meier method for survival and multivariable cox regression analysis identified prognostic factors. Results: 1153 patients were reviewed and 985 were included. 55% were male and the median age at diagnosis was 67 years. 287 (29%) completed curative surgery and 698 (71%) had locally advanced or metastatic disease; the median survival was 22 months and 9 months respectively. Lung and bone metastases were present in 18% (N = 180) and 6% (N = 58) of patients. In multivariable analysis increasing age and stage at diagnosis correlated with inferior survival (p < 0.0001) and the presence of any lung (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.63-0.94, p = 0.01) or bone metastases (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.54-1.0, p = 0.05) resulted in improved outcomes. Liver and peritoneal disease were not prognostic. Sex and family history of PDAC did not associate with survival. There was no association between site of metastases and sex however patients with bone metastases were significantly younger at first diagnosis (median age 63yrs, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Patients with advanced PDAC and metastases to lung or bone may represent distinct biological subtypes of PDAC. Molecular profiling of available tissue is ongoing.

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)0.002
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 score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.432 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207