Reporting trends and prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion in muscle‐invasive urothelial carcinoma: A population‐based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate reporting patterns and outcomes associated with lymphovascular invasion in a general population setting. METHODS: We identified all cystectomy patients with muscle-invasive urothelial cancer in Ontario, Canada, 1994-2008. Surgical pathology reports were analyzed for pathological variables including lymphovascular invasion. Lymphovascular invasion reporting patterns were described over time. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the association of lymphovascular invasion with survival. RESULTS: Of the 2802 cases identified, lymphovascular invasion status was reported in 75%. Lymphovascular invasion reporting significantly improved over the study period and was correlated with poor prognostic pathological features (T stage and N stage). Comprehensive cancer center status was not consistently associated with lymphovascular invasion reporting. Patients with lymphovascular invasion had substantially lower survival than patients who were lymphovascular invasion-negative or whose lymphovascular invasion status was unstated (P < 0.001). Lymphovascular invasion was independently associated with survival in patients regardless of lymph node metastasis. After adjusting for age, stage, comorbidity, margin status and adjuvant chemotherapy, lymphovascular invasion remained strongly associated with reduced survival (hazard ratio 1.98, 95% confidence interval 1.71-2.29). CONCLUSIONS: Although routine reporting of lymphovascular invasion has improved over the years, pathologists appear to be biased towards evaluating lymphovascular invasion in patients with high-stage disease. Despite this bias, lymphovascular invasion remains an important prognostic factor among patients treated by cystectomy. Pathologists in general practice should report lymphovascular invasion status more consistently and urologists should hold their pathology colleagues to a higher standard.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".