Quality of Life in Patients With Severe Skin Reactions in Course of First-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors Monoclonal Antibodies (Our Experience With Cetuximab)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with wild type expression of RAS and RAF genes can be treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies, such as cetuximab, in combination with chemotherapy. Skin toxicity represents the most serious and frequent side effect in these patients. Skin manifestations occur in approximately 80% of patients. In this study, we investigated the consequences on body image and quality of life (QoL) of patients with severe skin toxicity. METHODS: One hundred patients were enrolled with mCRC. All patients signed informed consent and completed questionnaires to assess QoL and body discomfort. Toxicity was assessed on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAEs). RESULTS: The greatest impact on QoL was represented by difficulties in managing skin rash-related side effects. Data showed a significant impact in psychological sphere and social relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Skin side effects, particularly rash, influence QoL and social relationships, compromising therapeutic compliance.
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) | 0.001 | 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".