MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of different risk factors on survival of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

2018· article· en· W2892151154 on OpenAlexaff
Elisabeth Morin, Normand Blais, Mustapha Tehfé, Marie Florescu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsbestosMesotheliomaInternal medicineRisk factorChemotherapyBody mass indexProportional hazards modelCancerSurgeryGastroenterologyOncologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e20561 Background: Asbestos exposure is main risk factor for pleural mesothelioma. We decided to look to the impact of different risk factors (Tabaco, obesity, sex, stage, histology, prior radiation, cancer family history) and treatment on survival of inoperable mesothelioma. Methods: Using our SARDO database, we retrospectively analyzed 79 patients diagnosed with inoperable malignant pleural mesothelioma diagnosed at CHUM from 2006 to 2016. Asbestos exposure was established either on working history or presence of pleural plaques at the time of diagnostic. Results: The 27 patients (39%) in asbestos-exposed group were younger (median age 67y) and more men but well balanced for other characteristics compared with the control group (n = 52) (median age 75y). Younger the 65y old patients had an overall better mOS at 18m compared to 7mo for patients older than 65y (p = 0.0001). In consequence, the asbestos-exposed patients had a significant better median survival 13mo compared to non-exposed patients 7mo (p = 0,047). Moreover, the exposed group was significantly more treated 55% receiving chemotherapy compared to only 8% in non-exposed group (p = 0,016). Standard chemotherapy treatment was the main independent factor to impact on survival. The treated asbestos-exposure group had a worse 18 mos mOS compared to 24mos in treated control group (p = 0.016). No difference in survival was seen according to sex (p = 0,096), clinical stage (p = 0,417), smoking history (p = 0,069), histology (p = 0.084) and body mass index (p = 0,415). Conclusions: Asbestos exposure had negative impact on survival when controlled for treatment. The mesothelioma treatment is the only independent factor to positively impact on survival in our 79 homogeneous treated patients. Younger age at diagnostic had also a favorable outcome on survival. No impact on survival was seen with tobacco use, obesity, stage, histology and sex in this analysis. The asbestos-exposed group was significantly more treated which is hypothesis generating.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207