MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023660975 · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2019.7382

Outcomes of Patients With Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer in Relationship to Opioid Use: Findings From Eight Clinical Trials

2020· article· en· W3023660975 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Abdel‐Rahman, Hatim Karachiwala, Jacob C. Easaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLogistic regressionOdds ratioProportional hazards modelClinical trialHazard ratioOpioidColorectal cancerOncologyConfidence intervalCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the patterns of opioid use among patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers who were included in 8 clinical trials and evaluated the impact of opioid use on survival outcomes of included patients. METHODS: Deidentified datasets from 8 clinical trials evaluating first-line systemic treatment of advanced gastrointestinal cancers were accessed from the Project Data Sphere platform (ClinicalTrial.gov identifiers: NCT01124786, NCT00844649, NCT00290966, NCT00678535, NCT00699374, NCT00272051, NCT00305188, and NCT00384176). These trials evaluated patients with pancreatic carcinoma, gastric carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and colorectal carcinoma. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate factors predicting the use of opioids. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to compare survival outcomes in each disease entity among patients who did or did not receive opioid treatment. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was then used to further assess the impact of opioid use on survival outcomes in each disease entity. RESULTS: A total of 3,441 participants were included in the current analysis. The following factors predicted a higher probability of opioid use within logistic regression analysis: younger age at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 0.990; 95% CI, 0.984-0.997; P=.004), nonwhite race (OR for white vs nonwhite, 0.749; 95% CI, 0.600-0.933; P=.010), higher ECOG score (OR for 1 vs 0, 1.751; 95% CI, 1.490-2.058; P<.001), and pancreatic primary site (OR for colorectal vs pancreatic, 0.241; 95% CI, 0.198-0.295; P<.001). Use of opioids was consistently associated with worse overall survival (OS) in Kaplan-Meier survival estimates of each disease entity (P=.008 for pancreatic cancer; P<.001 for gastric cancer, HCC, and colorectal cancer). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, opioid use was associated with worse OS among patients with pancreatic cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 1.245; 95% CI, 1.063-1.459; P=.007), gastric cancer (HR, 1.725; 95% CI, 1.403-2.122; P<.001), HCC (HR, 1.841; 95% CI, 1.480-2.290; P<.001), and colorectal cancer (HR, 1.651; 95% CI, 1.380-1.975; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that opioid use is consistently associated with worse OS among patients with different gastrointestinal cancers. Further studies are needed to understand the underlying mechanisms of this observation and its potential implications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkSame topicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseFrench-language works237,207