MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A randomized study comparing physician-directed or fixed-dose dexamethasone replacement following incomplete steroid premedication for docetaxel chemotherapy.

2019· article· en· W2947923256 on OpenAlexaff
Tina Hsu, Carol Stober, Dean Fergusson, Kelly Daigle, Noorza Moledina, Gregory R. Pond, Lisa Vandermeer, Christina M. Canil, Brian Hutton, John Hilton, Mark Clemons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-related skin toxicity
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDocetaxelPremedicationDexamethasoneChemotherapyRandomized controlled trialRandomizationAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6610 Background: Prior to receiving docetaxel-based chemotherapy patients often incorrectly take all or part of their steroid-premedication. The lack of standardised steroid-replacement strategies can lead to variability in care and delays in starting chemotherapy while nursing/pharmacy/physicians establish an individualized patient plan, which can use up valuable chemotherapy chair time. A randomised controlled trial comparing a fixed-oral dose of dexamethasone and physician-directed replacement was performed. Methods: Patients who missed at least one dose of steroid-premedication were randomised to either standard replacement with dexamethasone 8mg orally or physician-directed replacement (any steroid, dose or route). The primary outcome was time from randomisation to starting docetaxel. Secondary outcomes included rates of acute and delayed hypersensitivity reactions, fluid retention and skin rashes. Results: Sixty patients were randomized. Most patients were enrolled during cycle 1 (47.5%) and cycle 2 (22%) of docetaxel. The most frequent total doses of dexamethasone omitted were 24 mg (27%), 12 mg (20%), and 8 mg (19%). There were 7 different replacement strategies used by physicians. The most frequently used strategies were: dexamethasone 8mg IV (34.5%), 12mg IV (17.2%) and 20mg IV (13.8%). Patients in the fixed-dose arm received docetaxel earlier than patients in the physician-choice arm, at a median of 47.5 and 61 minutes after randomization (mean = 62.2 vs 83.4 minutes) (p = 0.033). No significant difference in rates of acute (0 vs 2)/delayed allergic reactions (1 vs 0), fluid retention (2 vs 1), or skin rashes (1 vs 0) was observed between the fixed-dose and physician-choice arms respectively. Conclusions: This is the first randomised trial to compare steroid-replacement strategies in this patient population. Fixed-dose replacement with dexamethasone 8 mg PO should be the preferred standard of care, as it reduces both the time to starting docetaxel and treatment variability, with no apparent increase in toxicity. Clinical trial information: NCT02815319.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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 OncologySame topicChemotherapy-related skin toxicityFrench-language works237,207