Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Clinical Practice Guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is the seventh leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, accounting for 4.7% of all cancer deaths, and is expected to climb significantly over the next decade. The purpose of this systematic review and guidance document was to synthesize the evidence surrounding the role of adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy and chemoradiation therapy [CRT], and stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and 11 guideline databases were conducted. Both direct and indirect comparisons indicate adjuvant chemotherapy offers a survival advantage over surgery alone. The optimal regimens recommended are mFOLFIRINOX with alternative options of gemcitabine plus capecitabine, gemcitabine alone, or S-1 (which is not available in North America). Trials comparing a CRT strategy to modern chemotherapy regimens are lacking. However, current evidence demonstrates that the addition of CRT to chemotherapy does not result in a survival advantage over chemotherapy alone and is therefore not recommended. Trials evaluating SBRT in PDAC are also lacking. SBRT should only be used within a clinical trial or multi-institutional registry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".