MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030965370 · doi:10.1097/coc.0000000000000716

Population-based Treatment Patterns and Outcomes for Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

2020· article· en· W3030965370 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dimas Yusuf, Ryan N. Walton, M. Hurry, Christie Farrer, D. Gwyn Bebb, Winson Y. Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAstraZeneca (Canada)Alberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStage (stratigraphy)Cancer registryInternal medicinePopulationChemoradiotherapyRadiation therapyConfidence intervalCohortLung cancerCancerMedical recordPalliative careOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) develop metastases and succumb to their cancer. Approaches to the treatment of stage III disease can be highly variable. Understanding current treatment patterns can inform the optimal integration of emerging therapies. In this study, we describe contemporary treatment patterns and outcomes for a population-based cohort of stage III NSCLC patients from a large Canadian province. METHODS: On the basis of the provincial cancer registry, all adult patients diagnosed with stage III NSCLC from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2015 were identified. Analyses of these patients' existing electronic medical records and administrative claims data were conducted to describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes. RESULTS: In total, we screened 6438 patients diagnosed with NSCLC, of whom 1151 (17.9%) had stage III disease. Among them, 61.2% were stage IIIA, 36.4% were stage IIIB, and 2.4% were unspecified. Median age at diagnosis was 70 (22 to 94) years and 50.2% were men. In this cohort, a significant proportion of patients received only palliative radiotherapy (35.6%), palliative chemotherapy (8.8%), or best supportive care (24.8%) as initial treatment. Conversely, relatively few underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy (11.7%) or trimodality therapy (1.7%). Surgery±adjuvant treatments were performed in 14.8% of stage III patients. Median overall survival was 13.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2-14.0) among stage III patients. Patients who received initial curative treatment had statistically significant better survival compared with those who received noncurative treatment (P<0.001); median overall survival 29.8 months (95% CI, 22.3-34.6) and 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.6-11.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based setting that includes community, regional, and tertiary cancer centers, use of concurrent chemoradiotherapy and trimodality therapy in stage III NSCLC was low despite evidence supporting the potential benefits of these strategies.

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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207