Natural history of pT3-4 or node positive bladder cancer treated with radical cystectomy and no neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a contemporary North-American multi-institutional cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study documents the natural history and outcomes of high-risk bladder cancer after radical cystectomy (RC) in patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy during a contemporary time period. METHODS: We analyzed 1180 patients from 1993 to 2008 with >pT3N0 or pT0-4N+ bladder cancer who underwent RC ± standard (sLND) or extended (eLND) lymph node dissection from 8 Canadian centres. RESULTS: Of the 1180 patients, 55% (n = 643) underwent sLND, 34% (n = 402) underwent ePLND and 11% did not undergo a formal LND. Of the total number of patients, 321 (27%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 2.1 years (range: 0.6 to 12.9). Overall 30-day mortality was 3.2%. Clinical and pathological stages T3-4 were present in 6.1% and 86.7% of the patients, respectively; this demonstrates a dramatic understaging. Overall survival (OS) at 2 and 5 years was 60% and 43%, respectively. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had a 2- and 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) of 72% and 57% versus 64% and 51% for those who did not (log-rank p = 0.0039). The 2- and 5-year OS for high-risk node-negative disease was 67% and 52%, respectively, whereas for node-positive patients, the OS was 52% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). The OS, DSS and RFS for patients with pN0 were significantly improved compared to those who did not undergo a LND (log-rank p = 0.0035, 0.0241 and 0.0383, respectively). INTERPRETATION: This series suggests that bladder cancer outcomes in advanced disease have improved in the modern era. The need for improved staging investigations, use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and performance of complete LND is emphasized.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".