MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132944838

Practice Patterns and Health Outcomes of Adjuvant Oxaliplatin Chemotherapy for Colorectal Cancer

2023· dissertation· W7132944838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Colin James Sue-Chue-Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxaliplatinColorectal cancerAdjuvant chemotherapyPropensity score matchingCohortAdjuvantRetrospective cohort studyDuration (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival for stage III colon cancer. Yet it is not without harms, most commonly dose-dependent peripheral neuropathy. The 2018 International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) trial sought to determine the optimal duration of adjuvant therapy by evaluating the non-inferiority (NI) of 3 versus 6 months of treatment. The 3-year disease-free survival probability was 74.6% in the 3-month group versus 75.5% in the 6-month group (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.15; pNI = 0.11). There remain open questions regarding how these findings changed practice, whether these outcomes are obtained in the general population, and – given oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy – the relationship between treatment duration and post-treatment falls. METHODS: We leveraged linked administrative and population-based datasets held at ICES to conduct three retrospective cohort studies of patients with stage III colon cancer in Ontario, Canada. First, we employed interrupted time series regression and mixed models to evaluate the association between IDEA’s publication and prescribed treatment durations. Second, we utilized overlap propensity score-weighted survival models to determine the relationship between treatment duration and mortality. Third, we again used weighted survival models to examine the association between treatment duration and fall-related injury. RESULTS: IDEA’s publication was associated with a 16.4% (95% CI 12.5-20.3%) absolute increase in patients treated with ≤50% of a 6-month course of therapy. Between-prescriber variation strongly influenced treatment duration in the post-IDEA period (median odds ratio 2.10 [95% CI 1.73-3.18] for short-duration treatment). Treatment with 50% of a 6-month course of therapy was associated with a HR of 1.13 (95% CI 0.88-1.47) for overall mortality versus >85% of a 6-month course of therapy. Meanwhile, treatment with >85% of a 6-month course of therapy conferred a HR of 0.84 (95% CI 0.62-1.13) for fall-related injury. CONCLUSION: Although IDEA could not conclude non-inferiority of 3 to 6 months of adjuvant therapy, the trial rapidly shifted clinical practice while introducing greater provider-level practice variation. While intuitive concerns about the relationship between oxaliplatin and fall-related injury are not borne out in the data, evidence from routine practice solidifies that treatment duration is a preference-sensitive decision involving a tradeoff between survival and toxicity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.405 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments→French-language works237,207→