MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) status as a clinical biomarker in patients receiving platinum-based systemic therapy: A case-control analysis.

2021· article· en· W3122478037 on OpenAlexaffabout
Deirdre Kelly, Ayelet Borgida, Sheron Perera, Robert E. Denroche, Spring Holter, Zhihui Liu, Zijin Liu, Amy Zhang, Anna Dodd, Stephanie Ramotar, Shawn Hutchinson, Julie M. Wilson, Faiyaz Notta, Jennifer J. Knox, Steven Gallinger, Robert C. Grant, Grainne M. O’Kane

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMount Sinai HospitalOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePancreatic cancerInternal medicineCohortPopulationOncologyChemotherapyCancerRetrospective cohort studyProportional hazards modelSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

430 Background: Familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) is broadly defined as kindreds with at least a pair of first-degree relatives with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA). The role of DNA damage response agents, including platinum has not been well studied in this patient population. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, treatment details and clinical outcomes were analyzed in pts with FPC with advanced, unresectable or recurrent disease enrolled in the Ontario Pancreatic Cancer Study database. The primary outcome, overall survival (OS) was calculated from the initial diagnosis of advanced disease until death. 179 non-FPC patients from the COMPASS trial [NCT02750657] served as a control cohort all of whom had full molecular profiling and family history documented. OS between pts that received platinum-based therapy, and those that did not was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, diagnosis year and FPC status. Interaction between FPC status and platinum was evaluated. Results: A total of 205 FPC pts were identified, 71% of pts had full germline testing and 16 (8%) had germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2. 104 (51%) were female and 101 (49%) male. Median age was 63 years (20-93) and 58 (28%) received platinum-based chemotherapy. Within the control arm (n=179), 71 (40%) were female, and 108 (60%) male; the median age was 64 years (29-84) and 106 (59%) received platinum-based therapy. In univariable analysis, median OS in pts with FPC was 16.9 months compared to 9.6 months (HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.37-0.58]). FPC patients receiving platinum had a superior median OS of 19 months compared to 15.5 months without platinum. In a multivariable analysis, both FPC (HR 0.33 [95% CI 0.21-0.51]) and receipt of platinum HR 0.53 [95% CI 0.38-0.73]) were prognostic. No interaction was seen with FPC and receipt of platinum (p=0.15). Conclusions: FPC status is prognostic but not predictive of platinum response in this study. Further molecular profiling of this unique cohort of patients will provide insights into putative predisposing germline alterations, and novel treatment 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→