MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1427586634

Clinicopathologic and survival characteristics of malignant pleural mesothelioma registered in hospital cancer registry.

2014· article· en· W1427586634 on OpenAlexaff
Kosar Najmi, Adnan Khosravi, Sharareh Seifi, Habib Emami, Samira Chaibakhsh, Golnar Radmand, Kian Khodadad

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsbestosMesotheliomaCancer registryLung cancerInternal medicineChest painCancerSurvival analysisMultivariate analysisSurgeryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare but fatal thoracic tumor, which in the majority of patients is caused by prolonged exposure to asbestos fibers. We aimed at presenting clinicopathological and treatment outcomes of 60 patients of MPM registered in our hospital cancer registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Demographic characteristics of patients, exposure to asbestos, smoking habit, their clinicopathologic characteristics and survival analysis were described. RESULTS: Sixty patients had MPM. Forty patients (66.7%) were men. The mean age of patients was 55.8±11 years. Chest pain and dyspnea were the most prevalent symptoms (31.7%, and 30%, respectively). Thirty-six (61.7%) patients reported asbestos exposure. The median survival and Progression free survival (PFS) were 10.5 months (0.95CI=9.22-11.78) and 7.57 months (0.95CI=5.68-9.45), respectively. In multivariate analysis, exposure to asbestos and epithelioid subtype significantly extended the survival time. Bilateral involvement, high blood level of LDH and platelet count ≥400,000 significantly shortened the overall survival. CONCLUSION: MPM is still an important health problem in Iran. Given the aforementioned results, developing a national program to eliminate asbestos-related diseases according to the world health organization (WHO) recommendation is necessary.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207