MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Medical Oncologists’ Perspectives on How the Results of the IDEA Collaboration Impact the Adjuvant Treatment of Stage III Colon Cancer

2019· article· en· W2982225675 on OpenAlexaffabout
Irene Yu, Allan Andresson Lima Pereira, Michael K.C. Lee, Krittiya Korphaisarn, John L. Marshall, Eva Segelov, Chris J. O’Callaghan, Howard J. Lim, Scott Kopetz, Jonathan M. Loree

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsFOLFOXMedicineOxaliplatinConfidence intervalColorectal cancerOdds ratioAdjuvantInternal medicineOncologyFamily medicineStage (stratigraphy)Cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) collaboration aimed to evaluate whether 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy are noninferior to 6 months. Our study objectives were to characterize medical oncologists' perspectives toward the results of the IDEA collaboration and to evaluate how IDEA impacted prescribing patterns of adjuvant FOLFOX and CAPOX in colon cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A list of questions developed by four medical oncologists regarding IDEA results were formulated and distributed online to gastrointestinal medical oncologists globally. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used to summarize information. RESULTS: Of 174 responses, 145 were complete and analyzed. Responses were obtained globally from South America (53%); the U.S. and Canada (28%); Europe, Australia, and New Zealand (12%); and Asia (7%). Most clinicians (98%) were aware of the IDEA study. Prior to IDEA, clinicians preferred FOLFOX over CAPOX (81% vs. 19%). Subsequent to IDEA, 55% of clinicians preferred CAPOX over FOLFOX (odds ratio, 5.0; 95% confidence interval, 3.0-8.5; p < .01 compared with pre-IDEA). Two thirds (68%) of responders tailored duration of adjuvant therapy based on risk stratification. Most oncologists (76%) were more willing to discontinue oxaliplatin early if toxicities develop after the results of IDEA. Half of responders (50%) found that IDEA increased their confidence in decision making for adjuvant treatment; 36% were unchanged, and 15% indicated decreased confidence. Less than half (48%) were comfortable communicating the study results and the concept of a noninferiority trial with patients. CONCLUSION: IDEA appears to have shifted clinician preference from FOLFOX to CAPOX for adjuvant therapy, and most clinicians now use a risk-stratified approach in determining duration of adjuvant therapy. Patient education resources may facilitate better communication of IDEA results to patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This global survey illustrates that most gastrointestinal medical oncologists now use a risk-stratified approach for determining the duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer. Clinicians are five times more likely to choose CAPOX over FOLFOX after the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) collaboration results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207