Real-world Patterns of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Patients With Resected Rectal Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze patterns of adjuvant chemotherapy among patients with resected rectal adenocarcinomas following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgical resection. METHODS: Alberta Cancer Registry and other provincial electronic medical registries (2004 to 2018) identified patients with nonmetastatic rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgical resection and either oxaliplatin-based or fluoropyrimidine-only adjuvant chemotherapy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was then undertaken to identify factors associated with the use of either regimen. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to compare overall survival between both groups and multivariable Cox regression analysis was then used to identify factors associated with worse overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients who fulfilled eligibility criteria were included in the current study: 347 patients received adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-only chemotherapy and 185 patients received adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. The following variables were associated with use of fluoropyrimidine-only adjuvant chemotherapy: older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.06), higher Charlson comorbidity index (OR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.00-2.15), and no involved lymph nodes in the surgical pathology (OR: 5.55; 95% CI: 3.66-8.41). Using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, no difference in overall survival between patients treated with adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and those treated with adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-only chemotherapy was identified (P=0.152). Within multivariable Cox regression analysis, type of chemotherapy was not associated with a difference in overall survival (hazard ratio for fluoropyrimidine-only chemotherapy vs. oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.61-1.71). CONCLUSION: Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is not associated with improved survival outcomes compared with fluoropyrimidine-only chemotherapy in this real-world study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".