Patients Experience of Living with Cancer Associated Thrombosis in France (LE PELICAN)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Previous research from the Europe and Canada has identified several areas of unmet clinical and support need for cancer patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is not known whether such experiences are restricted to those particular countries healthcare systems and/ or cultures. We sought to evaluate patients' experience of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) within France. Methods Purposive sampling of twenty three patients with CAT were recruited from a thrombosis service in a general hospital in Colombes, France, Semi structured interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were coded using Invivo software. Analysis was undertaken using an applied framework matrix with an inductive approach to identify any new themes. This was in order to explicate potential cultural and operational differences that were not apparent in the previous datasets. Results Twenty three patients (11 male, 13 female) aged 51-83 (mean 69) participated. The main commonality observed between French patients and those interviewed in the United Kingdom, Spain and Canada was the lack of information regarding the risks of CAT or signs and symptoms, which would necessitate medical attention. In addition patients reported a similar lack of verbal and written information regarding treatment choices and how to administer low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). However, French patients were not concerned by this since they perceived the doctor knew best and did not see information giving as a necessary aspect of their healthcare. They adopted a passive unquestioning role whereby the doctor was always right. This lack of desire to understand about their condition and in particular CAT, resulted in two major themes which are , thus far, have only been observed in this cohort of patients. 1. Lack of understanding and desire to know about CAT meant that patients knew less about their condition than other patients. Whereas patients from other countries were significantly distressed by knowing the potentially fatal nature of CAT, French patients were not distressed by their diagnosis, its implications on their cancer journey or the future. 2. Patients did not appreciate the utility of shared decision making and relied on the doctor to decide on the drug of choice. They did not wish to understand the rationale for this and thereby did not view the LMWH as a necessary inconvenience. Consequently they were very resistant to LMWH. Conclusion The dynamics of the doctor patient relationship in French patients differed from other countries, with patients adopting a passive role with respect to information requirements and their role in shared decision making. This dynamic appears to be a "two edged sword" whereby distress around CAT was minimal, in contrast to all other countries interviewed, yet a lack of knowledge impacted on acceptability of LMWH patient groups. This data has implications for the choice of anticoagulant in the treatment of CAT, particularly now that several DOACS have been evaluated for this indication. Disclosures Mahe: Leo Pharma: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Noble:Leo Pharma: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".