MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313621699 · doi:10.1200/op.22.00462

Patient-Reported Symptom Burden and Supportive Care Needs of Patients With Stage II-III Colorectal Cancer During and After Adjuvant Systemic Treatment: A Real-World Evidence Study

2023· article· en· W4313621699 on OpenAlexaffabout
Colleen Cuthbert, Dylan E. O’Sullivan, Devon J. Boyne, Darren R. Brenner, Winson Y. Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Oncology Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Colorectal cancerAnxietyCohortInternal medicinePopulationQuality of life (healthcare)Stage (stratigraphy)Physical therapyCancerCohort studyRetrospective cohort studyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) experience a range of physical and psychologic symptoms, and supportive care needs throughout the illness trajectory. We used patient-reported outcomes and administrative health data to describe symptom burden and supportive care needs during and after adjuvant treatment and determine factors associated with changes to symptom burden. METHODS: A retrospective population-based cohort study of patients who were newly diagnosed with stage II-III CRC in Alberta, Canada, between January 1, 2016, and January 31, 2019. Adults age 18 years or older who completed a patient-reported outcomes survey (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System) and supportive care needs (Canadian Problem Checklist) within 3 months after starting adjuvant treatment (during treatment) and > 7 months after starting treatment (after treatment) were included. Changes to symptom severity were stratified as stable, improved, or deteriorated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with these changes. RESULTS: colon). Prevalent symptoms included tiredness (80.5%), pain (50.8%), and poor well-being (50%) during treatment, and tiredness (71.3%), pain (44.2%), and poor well-being (62.1%) after treatment. The results were heterogeneous with respect to improvements, stability, or deterioration. Pain worsened for 25% of the cohort, tiredness for 28%, and depression, anxiety, and well-being for 21%, 22%, and 31%, respectively. Deterioration of some symptoms was associated with older age, stage II, comorbidities, rural setting, and higher income. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated symptom severity was generally low and most symptoms remained stable or improved after treatment. Particular groups of patients were at greater risk for more severe and/or more persistent symptoms. Ongoing assessments and interventions to address physical and psychologic symptoms, and supportive care needs in patients with CRC during and after treatment are needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Oncology PracticeSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207