MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884970318 · doi:10.21037/apm.2018.06.09

Predictors of dyspnea in patients with advanced cancer

2018· article· en· W2884970318 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin McKenzie, Matthew Hwang, Stephanie Chan, Liying Zhang, Pearl Zaki, May Tsao, Elizabeth Barnes, Yasmeen Razvi, Leah Drost, Caitlin Yee, Edward Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineLung cancerCancerInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: More than 70% of patients with advanced cancer experience dyspnea. Dyspnea is predictive of shorter survival and interferes with quality of life (QOL). The present study aimed to identify predictors of the presence and severity of dyspnea in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: A prospective database collected from patients attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic was analyzed for patient demographics, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores, Patient-Reported Functional Status (PRFS), history of smoking and respiratory conditions, pulse oximetry readings, and primary cancer site. Using the ESAS shortness of breath item, dyspnea was classified as mild [1-3], moderate [4-6] or severe [7-10]. Logistic regression analysis and generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to identify predictors of the severity of dyspnea and presence of moderate/severe dyspnea (ESAS ≥4) at patients' first visit and over time, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 252 patients with dyspnea data were included (median age 71.3 years, 61.5% male, 44.4% had dyspnea) in a demographic analysis. Multivariable analysis showed liver metastases (P=0.01, OR =2.04), a history of respiratory conditions (P=0.03, OR =2.09) and PRFS ≥3 (P=0.03, OR =1.75) were predictive of the severity of dyspnea at the first visit. Analyzed over time, liver metastases (P=0.02, OR =1.80), lymph node metastases (P=0.02, OR =1.79), a history of respiratory conditions (P=0.006, OR =2.50) and pulse oximetry <90 (P=0.003, OR =3.32) were predictive of greater severity of dyspnea symptoms. Patients with multiple radiation treatments in the thorax region were less likely to have severe dyspnea symptoms over time (P=0.01, OR =0.32). Lung metastases (P=0.04, OR =2.03), a history of respiratory conditions (P=0.01, OR =2.60) and PRFS ≥3 (P=0.009, OR =2.30) were predictive of moderate/severe dyspnea at the first visit. Over time, lymph node metastases (P=0.003, OR =2.51), a history of respiratory conditions (P=0.04, OR =2.37) and pulse oximetry <90 (P=0.0004, OR =5.15) were predictive of moderate/severe dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS: Liver, lung and lymph node metastases, a history of respiratory conditions, pulse oximetry <90 and PRFS ≥3 were predictive of the severity of dyspnea and moderate/severe dyspnea. Physicians should be aware of predictive factors that could lead to dyspnea to promote early intervention for improved patient care and the creation of screening tools for clinical practice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Palliative MedicineSame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207