MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patient factors related to the real-world adoption of 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in patients with stage III colorectal cancer (CRC).

2024· article· en· W4399880212 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tharani Krishnan, Emily Leung, 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
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerAdjuvant chemotherapyStage (stratigraphy)OncologyCancerChemotherapyAdjuvantInternal medicineSurgeryBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e15609 Background: Based on the IDEA analysis, 3 months (mos) of ACT with CAPOX is an option for both low-risk and high-risk stage III CRC, with potential resource utilization, cost and toxicity benefits. This study examined the patterns of uptake of CAPOX vs FOLFOX and duration of ACT, focussing on patient factors, in a contemporary post-COVID real-world cohort of patients (pts) in British Columbia, Canada. Methods: The provincial pharmacy database was used to identify pts with resected stage III CRC who received adjuvant CAPOX or FOLFOX from January 2021 to December 2022. Demographic, tumor, and treatment information was collected. 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, age > 70y (P = 0.039), low/intermediate grade (P = 0.005) and low-risk disease (P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with 3 mos of CAPOX. There was no difference in ACT choice with regards to ECOG status, ileostomy or pre-existing neuropathy. 29% of pts planned for 6 mos of ACT had low-risk disease, with 52% of these receiving CAPOX. Patients who received 6mos of ACT were significantly more likely to report neuropathy (68 vs 36%, P < 0.0001) and to stop oxaliplatin early (54 vs 31%, P < 0.0001). The most likely reason for early discontinuation of ACT was neuropathy in the 6mos group and gastrointestinal toxicity in the 3mos group (P < 0.0001). Irrespective of duration, mean time from consult to ACT was longer for FOLFOX vs CAPOX (24 vs 19 days, P = 0.007). Conclusions: In this contemporary cohort, use of 3 mos of adjuvant CAPOX remains low. 6 mos of oxaliplatin is still being offered to pts with low-risk disease, and is associated with more neuropathy warranting early oxaliplatin cessation. Exploration of patient preferences 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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207