Contemporary outcomes of 2287 patients with bladder cancer who were treated with radical cystectomy: a Canadian multicentre experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Type – Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 OBJECTIVE To evaluate data obtained from a large, multi‐institutional, contemporary series of patients who underwent radical cystectomy (RC) in a universal healthcare system aiming to assess outcome and identify novel prognostic variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data were collected and pooled from 2287 patients treated with RC between 1998 and 2008 by urological oncologists from eight Canadian academic centres. Collected variables included various clinicopathological parameters, recurrence and death. Survival and prognostic variables were analyzed using the Kaplan‐Meier method and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS The median age of patients was 68 years with a mean (median) follow‐up time of 35 (29) months. The 30, 60 and 90‐day postoperative mortality rates were 1.3%, 2.6% and 3.2%, respectively. The 5‐year overall, recurrence‐free and cancer‐specific survival was 57%, 48% and 67%, respectively, with a local recurrence rate of 6%. Pathological stage distribution was n = 498 (23%); pT2N0, n = 365 (17%); pT3N0, n = 463 (21%); pT4N0, n = 170 (8%); and pTxN+, n = 507 (23%). Only 3.1% of patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 19.4% received adjuvant chemotherapy. On multivariate analysis, lower pathological stage, negative surgical margins, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, performance of pelvic lymphadenectomy and an absence of smoking were associated with prolonged disease‐specific and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS RC performed at academic centres provides excellent local control of disease and an acceptable clinical outcome with low perioperative mortality in patients who are treated within a universal healthcare system. Smoking, pelvic lymphadenectomy and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy are independent prognostic factors for survival. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy continues to be under‐utilized in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".