MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412724789 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0325651

Frailty Assessment for Risk prediction in Gynecologic Oncology patients undergoing surgery and chemotherapy (FARGO) study protocol: Rationale and design of a multi-centre prospective cohort study.

2025· article· en· W4412724789 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie My Van Nguyen, Danielle Vicus, Liat Hogen, Tiffany Zigras, Guillaume Paré, Michael Chong, Yetiani Roldan Benitez, P.J. Devereaux, Sandra Ofori, Flávia K. Borges, Emily Di Sante, Olivia Panus, Jessica Vincent, Chinthanie Ramasundarahettige, Sofia Nene, Ameen Patel, Maura Marcucci

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsSt Mary's Hospital CentreMcGill University Health CentreImpactThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstitutePopulation Health Research InstituteHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersHamilton Health Sciences FoundationPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeGynecologic oncologyProspective cohort studyRisk assessmentInternal medicineCohort studyHazard ratioIntensive care medicineSurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is considerable variability in how older adults with cancer tolerate and recover from surgery and systemic treatments. A greater understanding of individual trajectories is crucial in guiding personalized treatment decisions. Frailty may explain these inter-individual differences. Despite emerging evidence on the association between perioperative frailty assessment and outcomes after noncardiac surgery, there is limited data in gynecologic oncology. A perioperative cardiovascular risk assessment, recommended by scientific guidelines, is widely adopted in noncardiac surgery, often as the only standardized perioperative risk stratification approach. While based on robust evidence on the association with cardiovascular complications and overall mortality, it might be insufficient to predict other essential surgical, oncologic and patient-important outcomes. METHODS: The FARGO study is a multi-centre prospective cohort study targeting 280 patients aged 55 or older undergoing surgery, with or without chemotherapy, for a suspected or confirmed gynecologic malignancy. The primary objective is to evaluate the predictive value of the Frailty Phenotype measured preoperatively, compared with the currently used perioperative risk assessment (cardiovascular risk assessment based on the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, age, and occurrence of myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery) in predicting the composite outcome of all-cause death or new disability at six months after surgery. Secondary objectives include comparing the predictive value of the Frailty Phenotype with that of the Clinical Frailty Scale; evaluating the performance of a preoperative frailty assessments on other postoperative complications, chemotherapy tolerance, and 1-year recurrence-free survival; exploring the added predictive value of a dynamic perioperative frailty assessment repeated 28 days after surgery; assessing the acceptability of frailty assessments by physicians and patients; and establishing a biobank to investigate frailty biomarkers. DISCUSSION: The findings could have important implications for risk stratification, planning and tailoring surgical and oncologic care for older adults with gynecologic malignancies. Our study emphasizes patient-centered outcomes and stakeholders' perspectives. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05738252.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→