Biological aspects of aging that influence response to anticancer treatments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cancer is a disease of older adults, where fitness and frailty are a continuum. This aspect poses unique challenges to the management of cancer in this population. In this article, we review the biological aspects influencing the efficacy and safety of systemic anticancer treatments. RECENT FINDINGS: The organ function decline associated with the ageing process affects multiple systems, including liver, kidney, bone marrow, heart, muscles and central nervous system. These can have a significant impact on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of systemic anticancer agents. Comorbidities also represent a key aspect to consider in decision-making. Renal disease, liver conditions and cardiovascular risk factors are prevalent in this age group and may impact the risk of adverse outcomes in this setting. SUMMARY: The systematic integration of geriatrics principles in the routine management of older adults with cancer is a unique opportunity to address the complexity of this population and is standard of care based on a wide range of benefits. This approach should be multidisciplinary and involve careful discussion with hospital pharmacists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".