MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1782486205 · doi:10.1186/1471-2407-5-48

Minimum follow-up time required for the estimation of statistical cure of cancer patients: verification using data from 42 cancer sites in the SEER database

2005· article· en· W1782486205 on OpenAlexafffund
Patricia Tai, Edward Yu, Gábor Cserni, Georges Vlastos, Melanie Royce, Ian Kunkler, Vincent Vinh‐Hung

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMagyar Tudományos AkadémiaSaskatchewan Cancer Agency
KeywordsMedicineSurgical oncologyCancerEstimationCovariateDatabaseOncologyStatisticsInternal medicineComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The present commonly used five-year survival rates are not adequate to represent the statistical cure. In the present study, we established the minimum number of years required for follow-up to estimate statistical cure rate, by using a lognormal distribution of the survival time of those who died of their cancer. We introduced the term, threshold year, the follow-up time for patients dying from the specific cancer covers most of the survival data, leaving less than 2.25% uncovered. This is close enough to cure from that specific cancer. METHODS: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database were tested if the survival times of cancer patients who died of their disease followed the lognormal distribution using a minimum chi-square method. Patients diagnosed from 1973-1992 in the registries of Connecticut and Detroit were chosen so that a maximum of 27 years was allowed for follow-up to 1999. A total of 49 specific organ sites were tested. The parameters of those lognormal distributions were found for each cancer site. The cancer-specific survival rates at the threshold years were compared with the longest available Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: The characteristics of the cancer-specific survival times of cancer patients who died of their disease from 42 cancer sites out of 49 sites were verified to follow different lognormal distributions. The threshold years validated for statistical cure varied for different cancer sites, from 2.6 years for pancreas cancer to 25.2 years for cancer of salivary gland. At the threshold year, the statistical cure rates estimated for 40 cancer sites were found to match the actuarial long-term survival rates estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method within six percentage points. For two cancer sites: breast and thyroid, the threshold years were so long that the cancer-specific survival rates could yet not be obtained because the SEER data do not provide sufficiently long follow-up. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests a certain threshold year is required to wait before the statistical cure rate can be estimated for each cancer site. For some cancers, such as breast and thyroid, the 5- or 10-year survival rates inadequately reflect statistical cure rates, and highlight the need for long-term follow-up of these patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations50
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207