MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294867924 · doi:10.3390/cancers14174334

Demographics, Outcomes, and Risk Factors for Patients with Sarcoma and COVID-19: A CCC19-Registry Based Retrospective Cohort Study

2022· article· en· W4294867924 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Wagner, Cassandra Hennessy, Alicia Beeghly, Benjamin French, Dimpy P. Shah, Sarah Croessmann, Diana Vilar‐Compte, Erika Ruíz‐García, Matthew Ingham, Gary K. Schwartz, Corrie Painter, Rashmi Chugh, Leslie A. Fecher, Cathleen Park, Olga Zamulko, Jonathan C. Trent, Vivek Subbiah, Ali Raza Khaki, Lisa Tachiki, Elizabeth S. Nakasone, Elizabeth T. Loggers, Chris Labaki, Renée Maria Saliby, Rana R. McKay, Archana Ajmera, Elizabeth A. Griffiths, Igor Puzanov, William D. Tap, Clara Hwang, Sheela Tejwani, Sachin R. Jhawar, Brandon Hayes‐Lattin, Elizabeth Wulff‐Burchfield, Anup Kasi, Daniel Y. Reuben, Gayathri Nagaraj, Monika Joshi, Hyma Polimera, Amit Kulkarni, Khashayar Esfahani, Daniel H. Kwon, Luca Paoluzzi, Mehmet Asım Bilen, Eric B. Durbin, Petros Grivas, Jeremy L. Warner, Elizabeth J. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research
KeywordsMedicineSarcomaRetrospective cohort studyCohortDemographicsInternal medicineCancerCohort studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PathologyDemographyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with sarcoma often require individualized treatment strategies and are likely to receive aggressive immunosuppressive therapies, which may place them at higher risk for severe COVID-19. We aimed to describe demographics, risk factors, and outcomes for patients with sarcoma and COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with sarcoma and COVID-19 reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry (NCT04354701) from 17 March 2020 to 30 September 2021. Demographics, sarcoma histologic type, treatments, and COVID-19 outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: = 16) received mechanical ventilation. A total of 23 (8%) died within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis and 44 (16%) died overall at the time of analysis. When evaluated by sarcoma subtype, patients with bone sarcoma and COVID-19 had a higher mortality rate than patients from a matched SEER cohort (13.5% vs 4.4%). Older age, poor performance status, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy, and lung metastases all contributed to higher COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sarcoma have high rates of severe COVID-19 and those with bone sarcoma may have the greatest risk of death.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207