MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W49207905

Complications after colorectal anastomosis in a patient with metastatic rectal cancer treated with systemic chemotherapy and bevacizumab.

2008· article· en· W49207905 on OpenAlexaff
Amine Akkouche, Lucas Sidéris, Guy Leblanc, Yves-E Leclerc, Petro Vafiadis, Pierre Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBevacizumabColorectal cancerLaparotomySurgeryChemotherapyCancerPopulationIrinotecanOncologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, San Francisco, Calif.) is the first humanized monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor to be approved in combination with systemic chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.1 Despite its survival advantage for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, this drug can delay healing of the wound and anastomosis.2 Because the half-life of bevacizumab is 20 (11–50) days, which the drug monograph makes clear, bevacizumab should be stopped 28 days before a surgical procedure to minimize complications.2 Scappaticci and colleagues2 reported a 13% rate of wound complications in patients who underwent laparotomy less than 28 days after the last dose of bevacizumab, together with a rapidly decreasing risk of complications after that time. For many reasons, patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are more likely than others to require emergency surgical procedures.3 Because bevacizumab is used in a growing number of people with metastatic colorectal cancer, surgeons will have to operate increasingly frequently on this high-risk population. The purpose of this case report is to highlight the need for special precautions when a laparotomy is mandatory in patients treated with bevacizumab.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207