Real-world evaluation of clinical outcomes and long-term survivors in patients with BRAF-V600E metastatic colorectal cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
166 Background: BRAF-V600E mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (BRAF-V600E mCRC) is associated with poor prognosis but confers response to combination BRAF/EGFR blockade. The goal of this study is to evaluate the clinicopathologic features and natural history of BRAF-V600E mCRC in the era prior to combination BRAF/EGFR inhibitors. Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients treated at the Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre with BRAF-V600E mCRC who did not receive combination BRAF/EGFR therapy. Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer prior to March 31, 2021, were included. Demographic, clinical, pathologic and cancer characteristics were abstracted from electronic medical records. Outcomes of interest included duration of therapy, as a surrogate of progression free survival, and overall survival (OS). Long-term survivor was defined as OS greater than 2 years. Results: 74 patients were included. Median age was 70 years (IQR=61-78), and 39 (53%) patients were female. There were 17 (23%) patients alive at the end of the follow-up period. 31 (42%) patients had poorly differentiated grade and 26 (35%) were mismatch repair deficient (dMMR). Locations of metastases included liver (40, 54%), peritoneum (30, 41%), lung (18, 24%), bone (5, 7%) and brain (5, 7%). Overall, 64 (86%) patients received first line systemic therapy, 19 (26%) second line, and 5 (7%) third line (see Table). Median duration of therapy in the first line was 4.3 months (IQR=2.0-9.6), second line was 2.9 months (IQR=1.4-4.1), and third line 1.0 months (IQR=1.0-1.9). Overall survival in the entire cohort was 13.2 months (IQR=4.6-25.4). Importantly, 21 (28%) patients were long-term survivors, of which 8 (11%) were dMMR. Conclusions: Patients with BRAF-V600E mCRC generally have poor clinical outcomes with traditional systemic therapies. In this study, we identified approximately 25% of patients who are long-term survivors (OS >2 years). This reflects the real-world heterogeneity of clinical outcomes for patients with BRAF-V600E mCRC who did not receive BRAF/EGFR targeted therapy.[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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".