Feasibility of a Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) Program for Gastrointestinal and Gynecological Cancer Care in Newfoundland and Labrador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peritoneal carcinomatosis is a common presentation found in advanced-stage gastrointestinal (GI) and gynecological cancers. Combined cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with significant survival benefits for select patients. CRS/HIPEC is not currently provided in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). The Canadian HIPEC Collaborative Group recommends that centres complete a minimum of one case monthly to maintain competency and achieve good outcomes. Thus, we aimed to demonstrate that the annual patient volume in NL justifies the feasibility of implementing a combined surgical and gynecological oncology CRS/HIPEC program. Methods: A retrospective chart review of the NL Cancer Care Registry identified patients with stage IV colorectal, appendiceal, or gastric cancer and stage III to IV epithelial ovarian cancer over a 1-year period (1 January 2020–31 December 2020) to identify the number of patients meeting the criteria for CRS/HIPEC and/or those referred out of province to receive the treatment. The results are presented as proportions and percentages. Results: Thirty-one patients were eligible to receive CRS/HIPEC during the study period (11 GI, 20 gynecological). Of the GI patients, 63% were referred out of province for the procedure. Gynecological patients underwent CRS and systemic therapy +/− outpatient intraperitoneal chemotherapy in NL. Conclusions: Allowing patients to receive this standard of care treatment near home reduces financial, social, and emotional stressors. Our results confirm a sufficient patient volume to support a combined CRS/HIPEC program in NL. The implementation of this program will require multidisciplinary collaboration, specialized training, equipment, and protocol development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".