MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcomes of elderly patients with node-positive colon cancer: A multi-center population-based cohort study.

2024· article· en· W4391091096 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carl Pinter, Shubham Sharma, Aunum Abid, Osama Ahmed, Haji Chalchal, Dorie-Anna Dueck, Dilip Gill, Joshua Gitlin, Branawan Gowrishankar, Peter Graham, Kamal Haider, Kimberly Marie Hagel, Mussawar Iqbal, Rani Kanthan, Selliah Kanthan, Duc Le, Jocelyn Moore, Shazia Mahmood, Adnan Zaidi, Shahid Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCohortColorectal cancerPopulationAnemiaCancerGastroenterologyProportional hazards modelChemotherapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

33 Background: Patients with stage III colon cancer are at high risk of recurrent disease. In this large population based cohort study we examined prognostic significance of chemotherapy and other clinical, pathological & contextual variables that are associated with inferior outcomes in elderly patients with stage III colon cancer. Methods: Patients ≥ 70 years with stage III colon cancer diagnosed in Saskatchewan, a Canadian province, and underwent resection of the primary tumor during 2012-2018 were evaluated. A Cox proportional multivariate survival analysis was performed to determine factors correlated with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: 404 eligible patients with median age of 79 yrs & M:F of 1:1 were identified. 48% were ≥80 years, 60% were rural resident, 66% had ≥ 1 major comorbid illness, 34% had WHO performance status >1, 14% has an ostomy formation, 46% had a T4 or N2 high-risk disease, and 50% had node positive to node harvested (NPNH) ratio of >0.1. 43% patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median time to start chemo was 9 weeks. Patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly older, had low performance status or experienced high rate of post-operative complications, high serum creatinine, low albumin, anemia, elevated WBC count and platelets. Median OS of all patients was 51 months (95%CI: 42.4-59.6), with estimated 5 & 10-yr OS of 45% and 30%. Median DFS of entire cohort was 32 months (26.3-37.7) with 5 & 10-yr DFS of 34% and 20%. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had median OS of 106 months (83.8-128.5) vs. 30 months (23.4-36.6), p<0.001 with 5 & 10-yr OS of 64% and 49% vs. 31% and 19% (p<0.001). Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had median DFS of 56 months (28.2-83.9) vs. 22 months (16.5-27.5), p<0.001 with 5 & 10-yr DFS of was 49% and 30% vs. 24% and 13% (p=<0.001). The Cox-multivariate analysis revealed a past history of cancer, HR, 1.32 (1.03-1.72); ostomy, HR, 1.33 (1.02-1.74); NPNH ratio >0.1, 1.34 (1.04-1.78); grade III tumor, 1.36 (1.04-1.78); WHO performance status >1, HR, 1.38 (1.05-1.82); no adjuvant chemo, HR, 1.38 (1.03-1.85); high-risk stage III disease, HR, 1.39 (1.10-1.79), and baseline CEA >5, HR, 1.75 (1.34-2.29), were independently correlated with DFS whereas past history of cancer, HR, 1.47 (1.12-1.94); ostomy, HR, 1.53 (1.16-2.03); NPNH ratio >0.1, 1.51 (1.15-1.98); grade III tumor, 1.54 (1.16-2.04); WHO performance status >1, HR, 1.42 (1.06-1.90); no adjuvant chemo, HR, 1.82 (1.32-2.50); high-risk stage III disease, HR, 1.60 (1.22-2.11), and CEA >5, HR, 1.98 (1.50-2.61) were independently correlated with OS. Conclusions: In elderly patients with stage III colon cancer lack of adjuvant chemotherapy, poor performance status, T4 or N2 disease, grade III tumor, elevated baseline CEA, past history of a secondary cancer, elevate NPNH ratio >0.1 and an ostomy formation correlate with inferior outcomes.

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)0.001
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.399 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments→French-language works237,207→