MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367605966 · doi:10.30683/1927-7229.2023.12.05

Survival Outcomes in High-Risk, Resected Colorectal Cancer with and without Maintenance Therapy

2023· article· en· W4367605966 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miklos Auber, Sijin Wen, Francesca Farran, Gerald M. Higa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineAdjuvant therapyExact testCohortDiseaseInternal medicineLog-rank testSurvival analysisColorectal cancerSystemic therapyCancerSurgeryStage (stratigraphy)OncologyBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Deaths due to colorectal cancer are disproportionately higher than either breast or prostate cancers even though the majority of new cases are potentially curable at diagnoses. If only half of the losses is due to metastatic disease at diagnosis, then a share of the remaining deaths must be attributable to tumor recurrence after presumptively curative therapy of early-stage disease. If so, current management of the latter group is suboptimal for a considerable number of subjects, a perception which argues for an assessment of maintenance therapy. Moreover, most recurrences occur within 24 months after standard surgical and (neo)adjuvant therapies.
 Objective: To assess relapse-free and overall survival among patients with high-risk, resected tumors who did and did not receive maintenance therapy following completion of treatment according to accepted guidelines.
 Methods: Pertinent clinical details were collected on 85 subjects, 37 who were, and 48 who were not, treated with maintenance therapy. Descriptive statistical analyses related to survival outcomes were performed on accumulated data. Wilcoxon rank test and Fisher’s exact test were used to examine the continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to analyze between-group relapse-free and overall survival.
 Results: Of the entire cohort, 63 of 85 (74.1%) subjects have no evidence of disease, a median of 5 years from the end of adjuvant therapy. Kaplan-Meier analyses indicated statistically, but not necessarily clinically, non-significant differences in median 5-year relapse-free survival, 79.8% vs 69.2%, and overall survival, 87.8% vs 81.7% in the treated and untreated groups of patients, respectively. A total of 21 subjects died; three of seven (treated group) and all 14 (untreated group) due to cancer.
 Conclusion: Obscured is the hint that maintenance therapy is clinically more effective than what the p-value intimates. The results of this retrospective data collection and analyses suggest that some patients with early-stage, high-risk disease, will derive survival benefits with maintenance therapy.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207