MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4282976142 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2022-3445

Abstract 3445: Long term effect of radiotherapy on risk of second primary lung cancer and overall mortality among lung cancer patients

2022· article· en· W4282976142 on OpenAlexaff
Eunji Choi, Vicky T. Lam, Jacqueline A. Aredo, Ashok V. Kumar, Jason A. Wampfler, Julie Wu, David C. Christiani, Iona Cheng, Christopher I. Amos, Leah M. Backhus, Joel W. Neal, Heather A. Wakelee, Ping Yang, Summer S. Han

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyLung cancerProportional hazards modelInternal medicineOncologyCancerHazard ratioConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Radiotherapy has long been examined in association with second malignancies, but the impact of radiotherapy for initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) on the risk of second primary lung cancer (SPLC) remains controversial. We evaluated associations between IPLC radiotherapy and the risks of SPLC and overall mortality among lung cancer survivors. Methods: We identified 689,785 patients diagnosed with IPLC in 1988-2013 from SEER. We applied cause-specific Cox (CSC) regression to evaluate association between IPLC radiotherapy and SPLC risk, adjusting for age at IPLC diagnosis, IPLC stage and histology, and prior history of cancer. To allow a latency period of exposure to IPLC radiotherapy on SPLC risk, we performed subgroup analyses restricted to patients who survived ≥5 and ≥10 years after IPLC diagnosis. Using Cox regression, we evaluated association between IPLC radiotherapy and overall mortality, adjusting for the same covariates used in the CSC analysis. Mediation analysis quantified the indirect effect of IPLC radiotherapy on overall mortality mediated through radiotherapy-driven SPLC diagnosis. Validation utilized data from 7,758 IPLC patients (496 SPLCs) at Mayo Clinic. Results: Of 689,785 IPLC patients, 18,818 (2.7%) developed SPLC in SEER. IPLC patients treated with radiotherapy had a reduced SPLC risk versus non-irradiated patients when evaluated at the time of initial diagnosis (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR]=0.90, P<1x10-6). However, the association between IPLC radiotherapy and SPLC risk was reversed when analyses were restricted to those who survived at least 5 years (csHR=1.08, P=0.01) and 10 years (csHR=1.16, P=0.009), thus long-term survivors treated with IPLC radiotherapy having a significantly increased risk of SPLC. Mayo Clinic data showed consistent results, with the effect of IPLC radiotherapy increasing from csHR of 2.41 (P<1x10-6) to 3.38 (P=0.001) among 5-year and 10-year survivors, respectively. Similarly, compared to non-irradiated patients, those treated with IPLC radiotherapy showed a significantly increased risk of overall mortality among 10-year survivors (hazard ratio [HR]=1.46, P<1x10-6 in SEER and HR=1.54, P=5.1X10-5 in Mayo Clinic). Mediation analysis showed that a substantial proportion of the total effect of IPLC radiotherapy on overall mortality—ranging from 32% to 59%—was due to radiotherapy-driven SPLC among 10-year survivors in SEER and Mayo Clinic. Conclusions: IPLC radiotherapy is associated with increased risks of SPLC and overall mortality, with its effects more pronounced among long-term survivors. Citation Format: Eunji Choi, Vicky T. Lam, Jacqueline A. Aredo, Ashok V. Kumar, Jason Wampfler, Julie T. Wu, David C. Christiani, Iona Cheng, Christopher I. Amos, Rayjean J. Hung, Leah M. Backhus, Joel W. Neal, Heather A. Wakelee, Ping Yang, Summer S. Han. Long term effect of radiotherapy on risk of second primary lung cancer and overall mortality among lung cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 3445.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→