The effect of a simultaneous versus a staged resection of metastatic colorectal cancer on time to adjuvant chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases may undergo a staged or a simultaneous resection. This study aimed to determine whether the time to adjuvant chemotherapy was delayed in patients undergoing a simultaneous resection. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2005 and 2016. The primary outcome was time to adjuvant chemotherapy. A multivariate linear regression was conducted to ascertain the adjusted effect of a simultaneous versus a staged approach on time to adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 155 patients were included. A total of 127 patients underwent a staged resection, whereas 28 patients underwent a simultaneous resection. Age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists class as well tumor, node, metastasis stage, tumor location, and number and size of metastases were not significantly different between the groups. The median time to adjuvant chemotherapy was 70 and 63 days for the staged and simultaneous groups, respectively (P = .27). Multivariate analysis did not demonstrate an increased propensity for prolonged time to chemotherapy after simultaneous resection (rate ratio: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.71-1.32, P = .84). There were no significant differences in the length of stay, complications, overall survival, and disease-free survival between the groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that simultaneous resection does not result in significant delay of adjuvant chemotherapy compared with a staged approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".