MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Real-world treatment characteristics for first-line therapy (1L) of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Canada and Europe.

2019· article· en· W2913866957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sharlene Gill, Dena H. Jaffe, Marc DeCongelio, A. Dubell, Jing Shi, Tami Wisniewski, Gwilym Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSorafenibHepatocellular carcinomaInternal medicineCirrhosisGastroenterologyLiver functionHepatitis CLiver cancerOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

353 Background: Sorafenib is indicated for the treatment of HCC. This study captures and describes real-world use of 1L therapy for advanced unresectable or metastatic HCC across Canada and Europe. Methods: A retrospective, non-interventional survey of 278 physicians in Canada (7.5%) and Europe (92.5%) (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and UK) was conducted between Feb-Mar 2018. Clinical and treatment data were collected from medical charts for patients aged ≥18y, who initiated and completed systemic 1L treatment for HCC within 2 years of data collection, and a Child-Pugh [CP] A/B at 1L initiation. Descriptive statistics compared 1L systemic therapy, sorafenib vs. other. Results: 706 patients were included (n = 504 sorafenib; n = 202 other [83% chemotherapy; 10% targeted therapy; 7% checkpoint inhibitors]) with a mean age at 1L of 62.7±9.3y and 79% males. Comorbidities did not differ by sorafenib vs. other for alcoholism (33%), Hepatitis C (14%), and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and/or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (9%) but did for Hepatitis B (12% vs. 6%) and cirrhosis (31% vs. 18%) (both p < 0.05). At diagnosis, more patients treated with sorafenib vs. other had portal vein invasion (56% vs. 35%, p < 0.001). At 1L initiation, sorafenib patients had better performance status (PS) (ECOG 0-1: 80% vs. 67%, p < 0.05) and preserved liver function (CP A: 58% vs. 47%, p < 0.05). The results indicated that sorafenib was used less compared to other systemic therapies among those with poor performance (ECOG 2-4) and poor liver function (CP B) (71% vs. 83%, p = 0.068). Median treatment duration was shorter for sorafenib (2 vs. 4 months, p < 0.001). The most common grade 3 adverse events were fatigue (9%), diarrhea (5%), and hand/foot skin reaction (4%). Conclusions: In this real-world chart survey of Canadian and European physicians, sorafenib remains the most commonly used 1L systemic therapy for advanced HCC. Patients treated with sorafenib were more likely to have cirrhotic liver disease, portal vein invasion, better PS and preserved liver function, but sorafenib use was not limited to CP A. Understanding determinants of 1L therapy is important as the treatment landscape of HCC is evolving to address unmet need.

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)0.002
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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis→French-language works237,207→