The role of single instillation chemotherapy in patients who receive subsequent bacillus Calmette-Guérin: A retrospective single centre study, and systematic review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate the combined effect of immediate intravesical chemotherapy and subsequent bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) therapy. METHODS: The study population consisted of 207 intermediate- or high-risk patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer who underwent an induction course of BCG between 1993 and 2007. We introduced single immediate instillation of 50 mg epirubicin for all cases in 2004, and thus earlier cases could be considered as historical controls. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). For cumulative analysis, we systematically reviewed studies indexed in databases. Including ours, the records of 856 patients from a total of 7 studies, including ours, were finally analyzed. RESULTS: In our cohort, the 5-year RFS in patients who received the combination therapy was 66.2%, compared to 55.2% in the BCG alone group (p = 0.149). Multivariate analysis on tumour recurrence showed that patients with the combination therapy had a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.74 (p = 0.189). A subsequent literature review revealed that RFS rates in the combination groups were higher than those in the corresponding BCG alone groups in 4/7 studies (p = 0.02-0.15), and lower in 1 study (p = 0.51). We identified 5 studies which examined a HR for combination therapy, and performed a cumulative analysis. Adding a single chemo-instillation prior to BCG resulted in a significant reduction in tumour recurrence (summary HR 0.69, p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggested that the combination of single chemo-instillation with subsequent BCG therapy exhibited an additive effect against potential tumour recurrence.
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 | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".