Lymphovascular invasion is independently associated with bladder cancer recurrence and survival in patients with final stage <scp>T</scp> 1 disease and negative lymph nodes after radical cystectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Lymphovascular invasion ( LVI ) is an important step in systemic cancer cell dissemination. LVI has been shown to be an independent predictor of disease recurrence and cancer‐specific survival in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder ( UCB ) for patients with carcinoma invading bladder muscle. Patients with final pathological stage T 1 N 0 UCB who underwent radical cystectomy ( RC ) have not been separately analysed for influence of LVI on outcomes. Our study shows that LVI predicts disease recurrence and cancer‐specific survival in patients with final stage T 1 UCB after RC . Objective To determine the outcomes of patients with final pathological stage T 1 N 0 disease after radical cystectomy ( RC ) for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder ( UCB ) and to determine whether lymphovascular invasion ( LVI ) is an independent predictor of prognosis in these patients. Patients and Methods Records of 958 consecutive patients who underwent RC at three academic centres were reviewed. A total of 101 patients with negative lymph nodes and with final stage (the higher of the pre‐ RC clinical/transurethral resection [ TUR ] and post‐ RC pathological stages) T 1 UCB were identified. The median (range) follow‐up was 38 (0.4–177) months and the median (range) number of nodes examined was 19 (9–80). Results Overall, 12/101 (11.9%) patients experienced cancer recurrence and 7/101 (6.9%) died from their cancer. The 3‐year recurrence‐free survival probability (SD) was 0.89 (0.04) and 3‐year cancer‐specific survival probability (SD) was 0.96 (0.02). Six of 101 (6%) patients had LVI , of whom four experienced disease recurrence and three died from bladder cancer. All recurrences and deaths occurred in patients who had either LVI and/or concomitant carcinoma in situ . On multivariable analysis, LVI (hazard ratio [ HR ] 4.9, P = 0.01) and higher pathological stage ( HR 8.5, P = 0.04) predicted cancer recurrence and LVI ( HR 6.7, P = 0.01) predicted cancer‐specific survival. Conclusions LVI helps identify patients with final pathological T 1 N 0 UCB who are at significantly increased risk of bladder cancer recurrence and death. These patients should be considered for close
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".