MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041583693 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0b013e3182805eb8

The Management of Patients with T1 Adenocarcinoma of the Low Rectum

2013· article· en· W2041583693 on OpenAlex
Calvin F. Johnston, George Tomlinson, Larissa K. Temple, Nancy N. Baxter

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbdominoperineal resectionMedicineLife expectancyRectumQuality of life (healthcare)Surgical oncologyColorectal surgeryColostomyGeneral surgerySurgeryColorectal cancerAbdominal surgeryCancerInternal medicinePopulationNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decision making for patients with T1 adenocarcinoma of the low rectum, when treatment options are limited to a transanal local excision or abdominoperineal resection, is challenging. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop a contemporary decision analysis to assist patients and clinicians in balancing the goals of maximizing life expectancy and quality of life in this situation. DESIGN: We constructed a Markov-type microsimulation in open-source software. Recurrence rates and quality-of-life parameters were elicited by systematic literature reviews. Sensitivity analyses were performed on key model parameters. PATIENTS AND SETTING: Our base case for analysis was a 65-year-old man with low-lying T1N0 rectal cancer. We determined the sensitivity of our model for sex, age up to 80, and T stage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measured was quality-adjusted life-years. RESULTS: In the base case, selecting transanal local excision over abdominoperineal resection resulted in a loss of 0.53 years of life expectancy but a gain of 0.97 quality-adjusted life-years. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated a health state utility value threshold for permanent colostomy of 0.93. This value ranged from 0.88 to 1.0 based on tumor recurrence risk. There were no other model sensitivities. LIMITATIONS: Some model parameter estimates were based on weak data. CONCLUSIONS: In our model, transanal local excision was found to be the preferable approach for most patients. An abdominoperineal resection has a 3.5% longer life expectancy, but this advantage is lost when the quality-of-life reduction reported by stoma patients is weighed in. The minority group in whom abdominoperineal resection is preferred are those who are unwilling to sacrifice 7% of their life expectancy to avoid a permanent stoma. This is estimated to be approximately 25% of all patients. The threshold increases to 12% of life expectancy in high-risk tumors. No other factors are found to be relevant to the decision.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.177 · 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