Are age and comorbidity independent prognostic factors in the treatment of metastatic NSCLC? A review of prospectively randomized national cancer institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
7117 Background: This study analyzed all patients enrolled in two large prospectively randomized trials of systemic chemotherapy to determine whether age and/or co-morbidity are independent predictors of outcome. Methods: Baseline information was recorded, including ongoing medical problems and current medications. This information was extracted and scored using the validated Charlson co-morbidity scale. Scores were then correlated with other clinical data, which included age, gender, race, performance status, histology, stage, weight, LDH, chemotherapy (type, total dose, dose intensity), response and survival. Results: A total of 1,255 patients (481 in BR10 and 774 in BR18) were included in this analysis, the median age was 61.2 years (range 34.2 to 88.7), 827 were less than 65yrs, and 428 65yrs or older. 391 had other medical conditions besides the primary disease of lung cancer, 310 with a Charlson co-morbidity score of 1, and 81 with a cumulative score of 2 or higher. There were more male patients with co-morbidity (35% vs. 21%, p < 0.0001); fewer patients with histologic subtype of adeno with co-morbidity (26% vs. 35%, p = 0.001); and more older patients with co-morbidity (42% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in overall survival in the elderly (≥65) as compared to the younger patients (<65). In contrast, patients with co-morbidity were associated with a shorter survival (p = 0.01). A cumulative Charlson score of 1 was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.28 (95% CI 1.09–1.5; p =0.003), and a cumulative score of 2+ was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.09 (95% C.I. 0.83 -1.44, p = 0.52). Conclusions: From these two large randomized NCIC CTG trials, one observes that age over 65 is not associated with a worse outcome. However, the presence of co-morbidity does appear to be a negative prognostic factor and co-morbity is more common in older patients. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.037 | 0.093 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".