MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405659367 · doi:10.1186/s12904-024-01628-8

Outcomes of patients receiving urgent palliative radiotherapy for advanced lung cancer: an observational study

2024· article· en· W4405659367 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Xu, Celestee Trach, Tracey Tessier, Rishi Sinha, David Skarsgard

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Palliative Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyPain medicineMedicineLung cancerPalliative careRadiation therapyIntensive care medicineOncologyInternal medicineAnesthesiologyNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is considerable variability in the management of patients with advanced lung cancer referred for palliative radiotherapy owing to uncertainties in prognosis and the benefit of treatment. This study presents the outcomes of patients seen in the Fast Track Lung Clinic, an urgent access palliative radiotherapy clinic, and aims to identify factors associated with treatment response and survival. Consecutive patients with advanced lung cancer seen in the Fast Track Lung Clinic between January 2014 and July 2020 were included. Patients who underwent radiotherapy were contacted beginning 30 days after radiotherapy to evaluate treatment response. Cluster bootstraps were used to compute confidence intervals for treatment response rate. Prognostic factors for treatment response and overall survival were identified using multivariable generalized estimating equations and Cox regression models, respectively. A total of 558 patients were included, of whom 459 (82.3%) consented to palliative radiotherapy for 1053 indications. The overall treatment response rate was 70.0% (95% CI, 65.8-74.2) for indications with follow-up (70.8%). Higher response rates were observed in patients with better ECOG performance status (OR per point, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93; $$P=0.01$$ ) and EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (OR vs wild-type, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.35-4.51; $$P=0.003$$ ), whereas patients treated for neurological symptoms had lower response rates (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16-0.45; $$P<0.001$$ ). There was no difference in response rate between patients who died within 30 days of starting radiotherapy and those who survived longer (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.42-1.67; $$P=0.61$$ ). Age; ECOG performance status; smoking history; pathology; EGFR or ALK mutation status; and the presence of liver, adrenal, or brain metastases were associated with overall survival. Palliative radiotherapy was effective for patients with advanced lung cancer, although response rates varied by patient characteristics and treatment indication. This study identified prognostic factors for radiotherapy response and overall survival that can inform treatment decisions in this population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Palliative CareSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207