MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Colorectal cancer sidedeness and its association with survival and tumor biology in operable patients.

2017· article· en· W2891084787 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Chan, Connie I. Diakos, David Chan, Alexander Engel, Nick Pavlakis, Anthony J. Gill, Stephen Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerInternal medicineStage (stratigraphy)Proportional hazards modelOncologyCancerLog-rank testGastroenterologyMultivariate analysisChemotherapyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e15110 Background: Recent data from patients with metastatic disease enrolled on trials of systemic chemotherapy have suggested that the sidedness of colorectal cancer(CRC) is associated with survival differences with better response seen with right sided tumours. The biological explanation for these differences has not been confirmed and there have been concerns that the differences relate predominantly to patient selection in clinical trial design. This study examines survival differences by side in sequential patients with newly diagnosed, operable CRC. Methods: Data for 3281 consecutive patients from the Northern Sydney Local Health District from 1998 to 2012 who underwent surgical resection of their CRC were retrospectively collected. Survival was assessed by log-rank test, association between sidedness and tumor biology by chi squared analysis and multivariate analysis by Cox regression. Results: Overall, there was a survival difference between left and right sided colon cancer and rectal cancer (p < 0.022). However, stage for stage, only stage 3 patients demonstrated a survival difference with right sided colon cancers (median OS 67.1 months, p = 0.009) but not left sided colon cancers (70.4 months p = 0.132) having inferior survival compared to rectal cancers (83.2 months). In terms of biological associations, right sided tumors were more associated with advanced age (p < 0.001), female gender (p < 0.001), more advanced T and m stage (p < 0.001), high grade (p < 0.001), thin walled vessel invasion (p < 0.001), discontinuous extratumoral nodules (DETN) (p < 0.001), peritumoral lymphocytic response (p = 0.002), BRAFV600E mutation (p < 0.001), mismatch repair deficiency (p < 0.001), low lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) (p < 0.001) and high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, age (p < 0.001), T stage and m stage (p = 0.001), grade (p = 0.002), extra venous permeation(p = 0.034), DETN (p = 0.09), MMR-BRAF combined status (p = 0.001) and LMR (p < 0.001) remained independently significant. Conclusions: There appears to be a difference in survival related to tumor site only in stage 3 CRC. Differences in tumor biology could account for these findings.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207