MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The impact of COVID-19 on the survival outcome of lung cancer at a Canadian academic centre: A real-world data analysis.

2023· article· en· W4379280702 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jason Agulnik, Goulnar Kasymjanova, Carmela Pepe, Jennifer Friedmann, David Small, Lama Sakr, Hangjun Wang, Alan Spatz, Victor Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineRetrospective cohort studyCancerCohortCancer registryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cohort studyOncologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e21200 Background: The Covid-19 pandemic directly affected the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of lung cancer patients. Our group recently reported that the rate of new lung cancer diagnoses declined during the first year and significantly increased during the second of COVID-19 pandemic. The effect of COVID-19 on lung cancer treatment outcomes in literature is still limited and mostly reported either as predictive survival using prioritization and modeling techniques. In this study, we aimed to quantify the effect of COVID-19 on lung cancer survival using real world data collected at the Jewish General Hospital, Montreal. Methods: This is a retrospective chart review study including patients diagnosed with lung cancer between March 2019 and March 2022. We compared 3 cohorts: Cohort1: 2019 (pre-COVID) Cohort2: 2020 (1st year of COVID) Cohort3: 2021 (2nd year of COVID). Results: A total of 417 patients were diagnosed and treated with lung cancer at our centre throughout the three-year study: 130 in 2019, 103 in 2020 and 184 in 2021. Although the proportion of advanced/metastatic stage lung cancer remained the same for the three cohorts, there was a significant increase in the late-stage presentation during the pandemic. The proportion of M1c (multiple extrathoracic sites) cases in Cohorts 2 and 3 was 57% and 51% respectively compared to 31% in cohort 1 (p < 0.05). Median survival for early and locally advanced stages of lung cancer was similar in the 3 cohorts. However, the subgroup of patients diagnosed in the advanced/metastatic stage had a significantly increased risk of death during the pandemic (cohorts 2 and 3). The 6-month mortality rate was 53% in 2021 compared to 47% in 2020 and 29% in 2019 (p = 0.004). The median survival in this subgroup of patients decreased significantly from 13 months in 2019 to 6 months in 2020 and 5 months in 2021 (Table 1). Conclusions: The present study represents the impacts of the COVID-19 on lung cancer survival outcome. The COVID-19 pandemic potentially caused the significant shift to M1c stage and contributed to an increase 6 month mortality rate and poorer overall survival in the advanced/metastatic lung cancer patients diagnosed and treated during the pandemic.[Table: see text]

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→