ArticleCancers2025
CHEcking Diagnostic Differential Ability of Real Baseline Variables and Frailty Scores in Tolerance of Anti-Cancer Systemic Therapy in OldEr Patients (CHEDDAR-TOASTIE).
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite chemotherapy-related toxicities being more likely in older patients, no routine prediction tool has been validated for the UK population. Previous research within the TOASTIE (tolerance of anti-cancer systemic therapy in the elderly) study found a low predictive performance of the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) score for severe chemotherapy-related toxicities. Building on this, the TOASTIE study dataset was used to assess the viability of developing a predictive model with baseline variables and frailty scores for severe chemotherapy-related toxicities in older patients.
methodsAll patients from the TOASTIE dataset were included, with the inclusion/exclusion criteria detailed in the TOASTIE protocol. Demographic factors, self-assessment scores, Rockwood Clinical Frailty Score and researcher's estimated risks of toxicity were assessed for their association with severe chemotherapy-related toxicities. After data partition into 70:15:15 train/validation/test, models were built on the training dataset using logistic regression (LR), LASSO and random forest (RF). Models were optimized with a validation set with LR and LASSO; cross-validation was used with RF. Model performance was assessed with balanced accuracy, NPV and AUC.
resultsOf the 322 patients included, the incidence of severe toxicities was 22% (n = 71). Ten variables were statistically significant, albeit weakly associated with severe toxicities: primarily patient-reported factors, Performance Status and high baseline neutrophil count. LR models gave the best balanced accuracies of 0.6382 (AUC 0.6950, NPV 0.8696) and 0.6469 (AUC 0.6469, NPV 0.4286) with LASSO, and 0.6294 (AUC 0.6557, NPV 0.6557) with RF.
conclusionsModels lack sufficiently robust results for clinical utility. However, a high NPV in predicting no toxicity could help identify lower-risk patients who may not require dose reductions, potentially improving overall outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.