MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403401140 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znae244

Chemotherapy switch for localized pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4403401140 on OpenAlexaff
Esther N. Dekker, Raja R. Narayan, Mohamed A Ahmami, Anis Meddouch, Eva M M Verkolf, A.M. Gehrels, Marc G. Besselink, Casper H.J. van Eijck, Marjolein Y.V. Homs, Bianca Mostert, Grainne M. O’Kane, Roeland F. de Wilde, Johanna W. Wilmink, Eileen M. O’Reilly, Motaz Qadan, Bas Groot Koerkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Cancer InstituteKWF KankerbestrijdingZonMw
KeywordsMedicineChemotherapyFOLFIRINOXGemcitabineOxaliplatinIrinotecanOncologyInternal medicinePancreatic cancerCochrane LibrarySurgeryMeta-analysisCancerColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with localized (that is non-metastatic) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with an inadequate response or toxicity to first-line chemotherapy may benefit from chemotherapy switch. The aim was to explore the available data on the use and effect of chemotherapy switch, as reported in the literature. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), the Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar on 1 December 2023. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients who underwent chemotherapy switch and the carbohydrate antigen 19-9 response and resection, R0 resection, and ypN0 resection rates after chemotherapy switch. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of five retrospective studies, representing 863 patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, were included and 226 of the 863 patients underwent chemotherapy switch. In four studies, first-line chemotherapy consisted of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan with oxaliplatin ('FOLFIRINOX') and patients were switched to gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel. Reasons for chemotherapy switch included an inadequate biochemical, clinical, or radiological response, or toxicity. Three studies compared patients who underwent chemotherapy switch with patients who only received first-line chemotherapy and found that the proportion of patients who underwent chemotherapy switch was 20.5% (95% c.i. 10.5% to 36.3%). The pooled resection rate after chemotherapy switch was 42.0% (95% c.i. 16.6% to 72.5%). Two studies compared the chance of resection after chemotherapy switch versus first-line chemotherapy alone and found a risk ratio of 0.88 (95% c.i. 0.65 to 1.18). Two studies, with a combined total of 576 patients, found similar postoperative survival for patients who underwent chemotherapy switch and patients who only received first-line chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: One in five patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma underwent chemotherapy switch after an inadequate response or toxicity to first-line chemotherapy. The pooled resection rate after chemotherapy switch was 42% and similar in overall survival compared with first-line chemotherapy only. Three ongoing trials are investigating chemotherapy switch in patients with an inadequate radiological or carbohydrate antigen 19-9 response.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0290.009
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207