MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Enrolment of adolescents and young adults with cancer (AYAWC) to clinical trials at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO).

2017· article· en· W2890530559 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Lum, Isabelle Laforest, Kenneth Tang, Lesleigh S. Abbott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialPediatricsRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e18043 Background: Five-year survival among AYAWC has seen less improvement than in other age groups. One hypothesized reason is low accrual to clinical trials, for which the reasons need further determination. Our objectives were to determine the enrolment of AYAWC on treatment clinical trials at CHEO, a tertiary care pediatric hospital in Ottawa, Canada and to determine barriers to enrolment of AYAWC compared to younger patients. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed at CHEO over 10 years from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015 was performed. AYAWC included 15-18 year olds, and younger patients included 0-14 year olds. Patients 18 years and older are treated at adult centers. The number of patients enrolled on an upfront treatment clinical trial was collected while those not enrolled were reviewed for documented non-enrolment reasons. Clinical trials available at CHEO during this time period were also recorded. Results: A total of 733 patients were diagnosed with 96 AYAWC and 637 younger patients. The proportion of patients enrolled on clinical trials was 19.8% (19) AYAWC and 27.3% (174) younger patients (p = 0.12). Trials were not available for 57.3% (55) of AYAWC and 53.7% (342) of younger patients for their disease type (p = 0.51). For the remaining 41 AYAWC, 46.3% were enrolled. For AYAWC not enrolled, 40.9% had a reason documented: for 22.2% a physician felt it was not in the patient’s best interest, 44.4% did not meet eligibility, 33.3% of families/patients declined. For the remaining 295 of younger patients that had trials available, 59% enrolled on a trial. For younger patients not enrolled, 25.6% had another reason documented: for 25.8% a physician felt it was not in the patient’s best interest, 45.2% did not meet trial eligibility, 25.8% of families/patients declined, 3.2% other reason. Conclusions: There were fewer AYAWC enrolled on trials compared to younger children. There were not fewer trials available for AYAWC patients than younger children. For patients not enrolled, the majority did not have an open trial available and otherwise, reasons for non-enrolment did not differ significantly between groups. Next steps could include data from local adult centers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.346 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→