MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898703046 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3617w

Comparison of Comorbid Conditions Between Cancer Survivors and Age-Matched Patients Without Cancer

2018· article· en· W2898703046 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Satyajeet Roy, Shirisha R Vallepu, Cristian Barrios, Krystal Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerInternal medicineHyperlipidemiaDiabetes mellitusCancer survivorComorbidityOsteoarthritisCoronary artery diseasePathologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors suffer from many comorbid conditions even after the cure of their cancers beyond 5 years. We explored the differences in the association of comorbid conditions between the cancer survivors and patients without cancer. METHODS: Electronic medical records of 280 adult cancer survivors and 280 age-matched patients without cancer in our suburban internal medicine office were reviewed. RESULTS: Mean age of the cancer survivors was 72.5 ± 13.1 years, and the age of the patients without cancer was 72.5 ± 12.8 years. The number of male cancer survivors was significantly higher than the female cancer survivors (52.5% vs. 47.5%, P < 0.001). There were significantly more Caucasians and other races (majority Asians) in the cancer survivor group compared to the patients without cancer group (81.8% vs. 79.3% and 4.6% vs. 0.4%, respectively, P < 0.05); while there were significantly less African Americans and Hispanics in the cancer survivor group compared to the patients without cancer group (10.0% vs. 12.8% and 3.6% vs. 7.5%, respectively, P < 0.05). Hypertension (64.3%), hyperlipidemia (56.1%), osteoarthritis (34.3%), hypothyroidism (21.8%), diabetes mellitus (21.8%) and coronary artery disease (21.8%) were the most common comorbid conditions observed in the cancer survivors. Osteoarthritis was the only comorbid condition that was significantly less frequently associated with the cancer survivors compared to the patients without cancer (42.9%, P < 0.05). The frequencies of all other comorbid conditions were not significantly different between the two groups. The majority of our group of cancer survivors had one or more types of the top six cancers which include prostate cancer (30.7%), melanoma (13.9%), thyroid cancer (11.4%), colon cancer (11.1%), uterine cancer (11.1%) and urinary bladder cancer (11.1%); while only a few had cancer of the cervix (6.1%) or breast cancer (0.3%). Use of aspirin, statin, vitamin D, multivitamins, metformin and fish oil supplement in the cancer survivors was similar to the patients without cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, osteoarthritis, hypothyroidism, diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease are the most common associated comorbid conditions in the cancer survivors. Osteoarthritis is less frequently seen in the cancer survivors compared to the patients without cancer. The frequencies of other comorbid conditions are not significantly different between the two groups.

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 score0.007

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.480
GPT teacher head0.667
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations95
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207