MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia with FOLFOX in the adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer.

2020· article· en· W3005023047 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Gotfrit, Horia Marginean, Jean A. Maroun, Sara Trincao-Batra, Timothy R. Asmis, Michael M. Vickers, Rachel Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeutropenia and Cancer Infections
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFOLFOXInternal medicineNeutropeniaColorectal cancerChemotherapyStage (stratigraphy)Retrospective cohort studyCancerGastroenterologySurgeryOxaliplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

38 Background: Patients undergoing adjuvant treatment with FOLFOX for colorectal cancer (CRC) are at risk of developing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN). We assessed the risk of CIN and the use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (GCSF). Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with CRC treated with FOLFOX at our institution from 2013 - 2015. Demographic and treatment data were collected. CIN was defined as ANC <1.5, and all episodes of neutropenia were assumed to be the result of chemotherapy. Results: A total of 302 patients were included (baseline demographics in Table). In the overall cohort, 174 (58%) of patients had at least 1 episode of CIN. The risk CIN was 47% in stage II, 60% in low risk stage III (T1-3 and N1), and 58% in high risk stage III (T4 or N2). Among patients with at least 1 episode of CIN, the 1st CIN event occurred during the 1st 3 months of treatment in 76%, and the median cycle of 1st occurrence was 4 (95% CI 4-5), which did not differ by stage. Among patients who had at least 1 episode of CIN, 112 (64%) had a 2nd episode at a median cycle of 9 (95% CI 8-10). Among patients with at least 1 episode of CIN, 79 (45%) received subsequent GCSF, initiated 1 cycle after the 1st CIN event 37% of the time. Among patients with at least 2 episodes of CIN (n=112), 58 (52%) received GCSF after the 1st or 2nd event. Of these, 40 patients (69%) started GCSF newly after the 2nd CIN event. Among patients starting GCSF after the 2nd CIN event, 47% initiated GCSF 1 cycle later. The median cycle at which the relative dose intensity of FOLFOX decreased to <85% was cycle 6 (95% CI 5-8) in those with no CIN events, cycle 3 (95% CI 2-4) in those with at least 1 CIN event treated with GCSF, and cycle 5 (95% CI 4-6) in those with at least 1 CIN event treated without GCSF. Conclusions: CIN is a frequent occurrence during the adjuvant treatment of CRC with FOLFOX and most often occurs in the first 3 months of treatment. While oncologists may treat some patients with 3 months of FOLFOX rather than 6, physicians must be aware of CIN regardless of the planned duration of treatment. Early initiation of GCSF may be a consideration. [Table: see text]

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNeutropenia and Cancer InfectionsFrench-language works237,207