MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403416808 · doi:10.1093/nop/npae097

Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully in adults with brain metastases: A NIH ORBIT model phase II feasibility and proof-of-concept trial

2024· article· en· W4403416808 on OpenAlexaff
Ashlee R. Loughan, Autumn Lanoye, Kelcie Willis, Sarah Braun, Alexandria Davies, Gary Rodin, Leroy R. Thacker, Amber Fox, Christopher Kleva, Giuliana Zarrella, Suzanne E. Mazzeo, Dace S. Svikis, Leigh Klaus Swartz

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesVirginia Commonwealth UniversityDOD Peer Reviewed Cancer Research ProgramNational Cancer InstituteMassachusetts General HospitalNational Center for Research ResourcesU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsProof of conceptOrbit (dynamics)CancerPhase (matter)Brain cancerMedicinePsychologyComputer scienceInternal medicinePhysicsEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) is a brief, evidence-based psychotherapy designed to help patients with advanced cancer cope with the practical and profound challenges of their illness. However, no study has systematically examined CALM in adults with brain metastases, despite the well-documented incidence of distress in this growing population. The primary aim of this trial was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of CALM in adults with brain metastases. Methods: = 13) and elevated symptoms of depression and/or death anxiety enrolled in this single-arm trial. CALM was administered in 6 biweekly sessions, with outcomes assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Feasibility was assessed based on established metrics including enrollment and retention rates. Acceptability was measured by post-session surveys and post-intervention interviews. Preliminary signal change on measures of psychological distress was explored. Results: = 58 years (SD = 12.9; range = 37-75). Nine completed the study (81% retention rate). Overall, participants reported high perceived benefits and would recommend the program to others. Baseline to post-intervention assessments indicated improvements in depression, death anxiety, generalized anxiety, post-traumatic stress, suicidal ideation, and spiritual well-being. Life quality, substance use, and fear of cancer recurrence remained relatively stable. Conclusions: CALM is feasible and acceptable and may improve psychological distress in adults with brain metastases. The findings of this study align with our previous trial of patients with malignant glioma and support a future National Institute of Health Obesity Related Behavioral Intervention Trials phase II randomized pilot trial of CALM in neuro-oncology. Trial Registration Number: NCT05087095 registered on March 23, 2022.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.326 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology PracticeSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207