Comparative study of adjuvant chemotherapeutic efficacy of docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in female breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This retrospective study presents a comparative analysis of the overall survival and toxicities, as side effects, of docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide (TC) and doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC). The study measured their efficacies during adjuvant chemotherapy, treating Pakistani breast cancer patients by validating the results obtained, with the published analysis of the same treatment given to US patients. Patients and methods: Between June 2015 and September 2017, for four chemotherapy cycles, 189 patients out of 358 received TC (75 mg/m 2 of docetaxel, 600 mg/m 2 of cyclophosphamide) and 169 were treated with AC (60 mg/m 2 of doxorubicin, 600 mg/m 2 of cyclophosphamide). On the basis of using pathological markers to assess patients, toxicities, as side effects, (due to docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide) were listed in the database of this study. Common factors with respect to common terminology criteria for adverse events version 5.0 and side effects listed in MedlinePlus, NIH US database, and from the database of this study were then separated to be included in comparison for this study. Statistically, chi-squared test was used at α=0.05. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the proportions of patients with vomiting, extreme tiredness, diarrhea, mild anemia, stability, and overall survival because P -value >0.05. However, AC remained less toxic ( P -value <0.05) by 22.6%, 25.7%, 25.3%, 12.4%, 20.8%, and 16.4% compared to TC for changes in taste, muscle pain, burning hands, change in hemoglobin level, moderate anemia, and needing blood transfusion respectively, whereas TC remained less toxic by 52.9%, 32.5%, and 26.3% for dizziness, weight loss, and sores in throat and mouth, respectively. Conclusion: At 27 months, TC was more toxic than AC, whereas both combinations had the same overall survival rate. Keywords: patient health during chemotherapy, overall survival, TC vs AC, pathological markers, toxicity of anticancer drugs
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".