MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Real-world adoption of 3 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin chemotherapy in patients with stage III colorectal cancer (CRC).

2024· article· en· W4391091197 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tharani Krishnan, João Paulo Solar Vasconcelos, Howard J. Lim, Jonathan M. Loree, Janine M. Davies, Karamjit S. Gill, Sharlene Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFOLFOXMedicineOxaliplatinColorectal cancerInternal medicineOncologyUnivariate analysisPopulationStage (stratigraphy)CohortCapecitabineCancerSurgeryMultivariate analysisEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

83 Background: Based on the IDEA analysis, 3 months (mos) of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) with CAPOX has emerged as an option for both low-risk and high-risk stage III CRC. This has resource utilization, cost and toxicity benefits (particularly less neurotoxicity) without compromising efficacy. This study examines the patterns of uptake of CAPOX vs FOLFOX and duration of ACT in a contemporary post-COVID real-world cohort of patients (pts) in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada. Methods: The provincial pharmacy database was used to identify pts with resected stage III CRC who received adjuvant CAPOX or FOLFOX between January 2021 and December 2022. Pts with rectal cancer requiring neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy were excluded. Demographic, tumor, and treatment information was collected. “High-risk features” were defined as pT4 or pN2 tumors. “Urban” setting was defined based on the population size of the regional health authority. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to examine baseline characteristics and Fisher’s exact test was used to examine univariate associations. Results: 452 pts were included, of which 234 (52%) and 218 (48%) were planned to receive 3 and 6 mos of ACT respectively (see table). Within the 3 mos group, 226 (97%) received CAPOX. Within the 6 mos group, there was a 51%/49% split between CAPOX/FOLFOX. By univariate analysis, factors associated with 3 mos of CAPOX vs 6 mos of ACT were age >70y (P=0.039), low/intermediate grade (P=0.005) and low-risk stage III disease (P<0.0001). 29% of pts planned for 6 mos of oxaliplatin ACT had low-risk disease, with 52% of these receiving CAPOX. Conclusions: 3 mos of adjuvant CAPOX is an accepted option for nearly all pts with stage III disease with consequent less neurotoxicity and fewer treatment visits. Yet, in this contemporary cohort, use of 3 mos of adjuvant CAPOX remains low and is associated with older age and low-risk disease. 6 mos of oxaliplatin is still being offered to pts with low-risk disease. Exploration of patient preferences, real-world treatment and time toxicities, and resource costs may improve more widespread adoption of 3 mos of adjuvant CAPOX in stage III CRC. [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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207