MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prognostic value of molecular markers, sub‐stage and European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer risk scores in primary T1 bladder cancer

2012· article· en· W1682822849 on OpenAlexaff
Bas W.G. van Rhijn, Liyang Liu, André N. Vis, Peter J. Boström, Tahlita C.M. Zuiverloon, Neil Fleshner, Madelon N.M. van der Aa, Sultan S. Alkhateeb, Chris H. Bangma, Michael A.S. Jewett, Ellen C. Zwarthoff, Bharati Bapat, Theodorus van der Kwast, Alexandre R. Zlotta

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersErasmus+KWF Kankerbestrijding
KeywordsCystectomyBladder cancerStage (stratigraphy)MedicineCancerOncologyInternal medicineDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The stakes are high when making treatment decisions in T1 bladder cancer (BC). Conservative management may lead to progression and possibly death from BC. Conversely, radical cystectomy could be over-treatment of non-progressive disease. The problem for clinicians is that reliable prognostic indices are lacking. We performed a head-to-head comparison of two substaging systems, European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk scores and four molecular markers in T1 carcinomas of the bladder treated conservatively with BCG. T1 sub-stage according to a new system (micro-invasive [T1m] and extensive-invasive [T1e]) was the most important clinical variable for predicting progression to carcinoma invading bladder muscle. The performance of the EORTC risk scores was disappointing for this T1 sub-group. Molecular markers were not significant in multivariable analysis for predicting progression. Future studies may lead to the incorporation of sub-stage (T1m/T1e) in the TNM classification system for urinary BC to guide clinical decision-making in T1 BC. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic significance of four molecular markers, sub-stage and European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk scores in primary T1 bladder cancer (BC) treated with adjuvant bacille Calmette-Guérin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The slides of 129 carcinomas of the bladder from two university hospitals were reviewed and the T1 diagnosis was confirmed. T1 sub-staging was done in two separate rounds, using a new system that identifies micro-invasive (T1m) and extensive-invasive (T1e) T1BC, and then according to invasion of the muscularis mucosae (T1a/T1b/T1c). The EORTC risk scores for recurrence and progression were calculated. Uni- and multivariable analyses for recurrence and progression were performed using clinicopathological variables, T1 sub-stage, EORTC risk scores and molecular markers (fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 gene mutation and Ki-67, P53, P27 expression). RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6.5 years. Forty-two patients remained recurrence-free (33%). Progression to T2 or metastasis was observed in 38 (30%) patients. In multivariable analysis for recurrence, multiplicity was significant. In multivariable analysis for progression, female gender, sub-stage (T1m/T1e) and carcinoma in situ (CIS) were significant. Molecular markers were significant in univariable and in multivariable analyses for recurrence. EORTC risk scores were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: CIS, female gender and sub-stage (T1m/T1e) were the most important variables for progression. The additional value of molecular markers was modest. Sub-stage (T1m/T1e) could potentially be incorporated in future tumour-node-metastasis classifications.

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)0.001
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations64
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207