MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

International validation of the prognostic value of subclassification for AJCC stage pT3 upper tract urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis

2012· article· en· W1844666291 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Roscigno, Michael Rink, Christian Seitz, Giacomo Novara, Thomas Chromecki, Hans‐Martin Fritsche, Kazumasa Matsumoto, Thomas J. Walton, Joaquı́n Carballido, L. Da Pozzo, Roberto Bertini, Vincenzo Ficarra, Wolfgang Otto, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Armin Pycha, Harun Fajković, Richard Naspro, Douglas S. Scherr, Francesco Montorsi, Shahrokh F. Shariat

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal pelvisUrothelial carcinomaStage (stratigraphy)MedicineUpper urinary tractPelvisUrologyCarcinomaUrotheliumOncologyInternal medicineRadiologyUreterUrinary systemCancerUrinary bladderGeologyBladder cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Tumour stage is a powerful predictor of clinical outcomes and the most important factor driving clinical decision-making after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). It has been suggested that renal pelvic pT3 subclassification into microscopic infiltration of the renal parenchyma (pT3a) versus macroscopic infiltration or invasion of peripelvic adipose tissue (pT3b) has strong prognostic value. This is an external validation study of the prognostic value of pT3 subclassification of renal pelvic UTUC in a large international cohort of patients treated with RNU. pT3b UTUC is associated with features of aggressive tumour biology, disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality. However, pT3 subclassification is not an independent predictor of clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the prognostic value of subclassification of pT3 renal pelvic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) in a large international cohort of patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The RNU specimens with pT3 UTUC of the renal pelvis from 284 patients at 11 centres located in Asia, North America and Europe were retrospectively evaluated. All specimens were reviewed by genitourinary pathologists at each institution. Tumours were categorized as pT3a (microscopic infiltration of the renal parenchyma) or pT3b (macroscopic infiltration of the renal parenchyma and/or infiltration of peripelvic adipose tissue). RESULTS: Overall, 148 (52%) tumours were classified as pT3a and 136 (48%) as pT3b. Patients with pT3b disease were more likely to have high-grade tumours and sessile tumour architecture (all P ≤ 0.02). Patients with pT3b tumours were at increased risk of disease recurrence (5-year estimates: 55% versus 42%, P = 0.012) and cancer-specific mortality (CSM) (5-year estimates: 48% versus 40%, P = 0.04). Lymph node status, tumour architecture and tumour grade were independently associated with disease recurrence, whereas lymph node status, tumour architecture and lymphovascular invasion were independently associated with CSM. Subclassification of pT3 tumours was not associated with recurrence or CSM in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: Patients with pT3b UTUC were more likely to have tumours with aggressive pathological features and were at higher risk of disease recurrence and CSM after RNU compared with patients with pT3a disease. However, the pT3 subclassification did not remain an independent predictor of disease recurrence or CSM after controlling for tumour grade, lymph node status, tumour architecture and lymphovascular invasion.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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