MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199921489 · doi:10.2217/cer-2021-0113

Outcomes of patients with nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma according to perioperative treatment strategy: a real-world, population-based study

2021· article· en· W3199921489 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Abdel‐Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Effectiveness Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeHazard ratioInternal medicineProportional hazards modelGastrectomyCancerPopulationRadiation therapySurveillance, Epidemiology, and End ResultsOncologySurgeryCancer registryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: To assess the survival outcomes of patients with nonmetastatic gastric cancer according to the type of perioperative treatment strategy used (surgery-only, adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, perioperative chemotherapy) in a population-based setting. Materials & methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results research-plus database was explored, and patients with nonmetastatic gastric cancer who were treated with an oncologic surgery were reviewed. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to examine the impact of treatment strategy on overall and cancer-specific survival. Results: A total of 11,526 patients were found to be eligible and they were included in the current analysis. Looking at the percentages of different treatment strategies throughout the study years (2006–2017), the use of the following strategies increased: adjuvant chemotherapy (20.1 vs 10.6%), and perioperative chemotherapy (21.3 vs 0.5%); while the use of the following strategies decreased: surgery only (36.2 vs 58.2%), and adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (22.4 vs 30.6%). Using multivariable Cox regression analysis, the following factors were associated with worse overall survival: older age (hazard [HR]: 1.021; 95% CI: 1.018–1.023), males (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.04–1.14), Black race (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.04–1.19), cardia subsite (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.02–1.17), grade 3–4 (HR:1.32; 95% CI: 1.25–1.40), diffuse histology (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.35–1.58), clinically node positive (HR:1.43; 95% CI: 1.34–1.53), total gastrectomy (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.13–1.28), and surgery-only approach (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.55–1.75). Conclusion: Among patients with localized gastric cancer, patients who were treated with surgery-only, and to a less extent, patients who were treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy have worse survival outcomes; while those treated with perioperative chemotherapy have the best survival outcomes.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207