Sex as an Independent Prognostic Factor in a Population-Based, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Males with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tend to experience worse outcomes, as do those with nonadenocarcinoma histology; however, the independent effects of these factors remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the independent effect of sex and histology on mortality in a population of patients with NSCLC. METHODS: All patients with NSCLC in Manitoba from 1985 to 2004 were identified from the Manitoba Cancer Registry. Treatment data were extracted from the Manitoba Health administrative databases and linked to the registry. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the independent effect of sex on survival. RESULTS: A total of 10,908 patients (6665 male, 4243 female) with NSCLC were identified. Females had a median overall survival of 9.4 months versus 6.8 months for males (P<0.001). The adjusted HR for death for males compared with females was 1.13 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.23; P=0.004). Sex modified the effect of surgical treatment on survival (HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.13 to 1.40]; P<0.001). Adenocarcinoma histology modified the effect of sex on survival (HR 1.36 [95% CI 1.24 to 1.50]; P<0.001) when treatment was accounted for. CONCLUSION: Females experienced a significantly better survival rate than males independent of treatment, age, year of diagnosis and histology. This was greatest in surgically treated patients and in those with adenocarcinoma.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".