MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231355252 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v71i2.1916

Vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Has a survival benefit been achieved in clinical practice?

2018· article· en· W4231355252 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lesley Street, Carole Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVinorelbineMedicineCisplatinOncologyInternal medicineLung cancerGynecologyPopulationRegimenChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Purpose: Vinorelbine used in conjunction with cisplatin in advanced, inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer has been linked to a survival advantage in this otherwise terminal disease. Survival outcomes achieved in clinical trials, however, may not be matched in practice thus necessitating this practical evaluation. Methods: A provincial evaluation of all patients treated with this regimen from September 1994 to July 1996 was conducted by chart review. Survival data was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier methodology. Results: The median survival time and survival rate observed in this practical evaluation was comparable to that achieved in an earlier clinical trial. A paradoxical trend between lower dose intensity of both vinorelbine and cisplatin and improved survival was noted (p<0.0005). Hematological toxicity was common. Conclusion: A survival advantage of vinorelbine and cisplatin in this population when compared with best supportive care was observed.Further investigations of different doses and schedules as well as quality of life assessments would complement the finding of this study. RÉSUMÉ Objectif : L'administration conjointe de vinorelbine et de cisplatine dans les cas de cancer du poumon à grandes cellules inopérable a été associée à une meilleure survie clans ces cas de maladie autrement fatale. Cependant, ces avantages au plan de la de survie observés lors des essais cliniques pourraient ne pas être reproductibles dans la pratique. C'est pourquoi cette évaluation pratique est nécessaire. Méthode : Une évaluation de tous les patients traités par cette association médicamenteuse de septembre 1994 à juillet 1996 a été menée dans la province, à partir de l'analyse des dossiers médicaux des patients. Les données sur la survie ont été analysées au moyen de la méthode de Kaplan-Meyer. Résultats : Le temps de survie et le taux de survie moyens notés au cours de cette évaluation pratique étaient comparables à ceux observés lors des essais cliniques antérieurs. Une tendance paradoxale entre de faibles doses de vinorelbine et de cisplatine et une amélioration de la survie a été notée (p < 0,0005). L'hématotoxicité était courante. Conclusion : On a remarqué un avantage au plan de la survie avec l'administration conjointe de vinorelbine et de cisplatine dans cette population, en comparaison aux meilleurs soins de soutien. Des études de doses et de schémas posologiques plus poussées el des évaluations de la qualité de vie viendraient compléter les résultats de cette étude.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.358 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy→Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→