Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31560842›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2019

Optimal frequency of scans for patients on cancer therapies: A population kinetics assessment.

David J Stewart, David B Macdonald, Arif A Awan, Kednapa Thavorn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

David J StewartUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0184-7946
David B MacdonaldUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Arif A AwanUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8552-6831
Kednapa ThavornUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4738-8447

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimal frequency of follow-up scans for patients receiving systemic therapies is poorly defined. Progression-free survival (PFS) generally follows first-order kinetics. We used exponential decay nonlinear regression analysis to calculate half-lives for 887 published PFS curves.

methodWe used the Excel formula x = EXP(-t

resultsProportion of residual patients predicted to remain progression-free at each subsequent scan varied with scan intervals and regimen PFS half-life. For example, with a 4-month half-life (17.3 weeks) and scans every 6 weeks, 21% of patients would progress by the first scan, 21% of the remaining patients would progress by the second scan at 12 weeks, etc With 2, 6- and 12-month half-lives (for example), the proportion of remaining patients progressing at each subsequent scan if repeated every 3 weeks would be 21%, 8% and 4%, respectively, while with scans every 12 weeks it would be 62%, 27% and 15%, respectively. Furthermore, optimal scan frequency can be calculated for populations comprised of distinct rapidly and slowly progressing subpopulations, as well as with convex curves arising from treatment breaks, where optimal scan frequency may differ during therapy administration vs during more rapid progression after therapy interruption.

conclusionsA population kinetics approach permits a regimen- and tumor-specific determination of optimal scan frequency for patients on systemic therapies.

Indexed as

HumansKineticsNeoplasmsProgression-Free Survivalpopulation kineticsscan frequency

Identifiers

PMID31560842
PMCPMC6853816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.