MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Unmet supportive care needs of older adults with advanced cancer.

2017· article· en· W2890094213 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brandon Temel, Margaret Ruddy, Emily Miller, Samantha M.C. Moran, Charn‐Xin Fuh, Ardeshir Z. Hashmi, Erin Scott, Vicki A. Jackson, Areej El‐Jawahri, Jennifer S. Temel, Ryan David Nipp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Geriatric oncologyDepression (economics)ComorbidityCancerGeriatric Depression ScaleGeriatricsGerontologyInternal medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryAnxietyDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10040 Background: Cancer disproportionately affects older adults, yet research defining the supportive care needs of these patients is lacking. We sought to examine associations between geriatric impairments, quality of life (QOL), and physical and psychological symptom burden in older adults with newly diagnosed incurable gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients age ≥70 within 8 weeks of diagnosis of incurable GI cancer at Massachusetts General Hospital from 10/2015-11/2016. We used surveys to assess geriatric impairments (Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 [range 0-10, scores ≥3 identify patients with impairments), QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30 [range 0-100, higher scores indicate better QOL]), physical symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [range 0-10, higher scores indicate greater symptom burden]) and psychological symptoms (Geriatric Depression Scale, [range 0-15, higher scores indicate greater depression symptoms]). We used descriptive statistics to determine differences in patient characteristics by the presence or absence of geriatric impairments. We used linear regression adjusted for age, employment, cancer type, and comorbidity to examine associations between geriatric impairments, QOL, and physical and psychological symptom burden. Results: We enrolled 50 of 58 (86%) patients approached (mean age = 78.7; 52% with pancreatic cancer). Nearly half (46%) screened positive for geriatric impairments; these patients were older (81.7 vs 76.1, p < .01) and had more comorbid conditions (2.4 vs 1.2, p = .01). On linear regression, patients with geriatric impairments reported worse QOL across all domains (General QOL: B = -28.3, p < .01; Physical: B = -36.8, p < .01; Role: B = -36.8, p < .01; Emotional: B = -30.1, p < .01; Cognitive: B = -17.8, p = .03; Social: B = -39.7, p < .01), higher depression scores (B = 5.1, p < .01) and worse fatigue (B = 4.6, p < .01), drowsiness (B = 4.0, p < .01), appetite (B = 3.8, p < .01), and pain (B = 2.7, p = .02). Conclusions: Older adults with advanced cancer experience considerable unmet supportive care needs, particularly those with geriatric impairments. Future research is needed to assess older patients for geriatric impairments and address their unique palliative and supportive care needs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.411 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→