MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Symptom burden of patients with advanced pancreas cancer (APC): A provincial cancer institute observational study.

2019· article· en· W2913676144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Ward, Christina Kim, Pascal Lambert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineNauseaCancerCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

384 Background: Patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) experience many disease-related symptoms. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) measures the severity of 9 separate domains, and is completed by pts at each visit at our provincial cancer institute. The aim of this study was to describe symptom burden at baseline and over time for chemotherapy (CT) treated pts with APC, using ESAS. Methods: Pts diagnosed with APC between 2012-2016 and treated with at least 1 cycle of CT were identified. ESAS scores were extracted from the electronic medical record. Descriptive statistics were used to report the most common symptoms of pts with APC. A joint model was used to describe the trajectory of ESAS during follow-up while controlling for death. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify independent predictors of death. Results: Of 123 pts identified, 61% had metastatic disease, 82.1% had a baseline ECOG of 0-1, with an average age of 64.8. 1608 clinic visits had an ESAS score documented and 87% of pts completed ≥ 2 ESAS assessments. Median overall survival was 10.2 months. Median progression free survival was 6.7 months. At baseline, the 10th percentile, median and 90th percentile for total symptom distress (TSD) score were 6.2, 24 and 53 respectively. 86% of pts had at least one ESAS score of ≥ 4 at baseline, with the most common being: fatigue, nausea, anxiety, and shortness of breath. Using a joint model, average TSD scores for the cohort improved for the first 4 to 5 months after starting CT and started to rise after 6 months. Average TSD scores at 15 to 18 months were similar to scores at baseline. Controlling for metastatic disease and CT type, for every increase of 10 in baseline TSD score, there was a 5% increased risk of death. Conclusions: The ESAS tool reflects the heavy burden of cancer-associated symptoms in APC. Symptoms improve months after starting CT and eventually worsen. The impact of early intervention to address symptom management is an important area of investigation in APC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207