MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2053563036 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11276

Outcomes of pT0N0 at radical cystectomy: The Canadian Bladder Cancer Network experience

2012· article· en· W2053563036 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gurdarshan S. Sandhu, Armen Aprikian, Joseph L. Chin, Yves Fradet, Jonathan I. Izawa, Eric Estey, Adrian Fairey, Ricardo Rendon, Ilias Cagiannos, Louis Lacombe, Jean‐Baptiste Lattouf, David Bell, Wassim Kassouf, Darrel Drachenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystectomyBladder cancerMedicineProportional hazards modelHazard ratioStage (stratigraphy)UrologySurvival analysisOncologyPopulationInternal medicineSurgeryCancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: : Radical cystectomy is the standard treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer. We assessed clinical outcomes in patients found to have no evidence of disease (i.e., pT0N0) following radical cystectomy. METHODS: : We collected and pooled a database of 2287 patients who underwent radical cystectomy between 1993 and 2008 in eight centres across Canada. Of this number, 135 patients were found to have pT0N0 bladder cancer at the time of cystectomy. Survival data and prognostic variables were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. RESULTS: : Median patient age was 66 years with a mean follow-up of 42 months. Clinical stage distribution was Tis 8.9%, Ta 1.5%, T1 20.7%, T2 45.2%, T3 5.2%, and T4 5.2%. The five-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) were 83%, 96%, and 88%, respectively. The 10-year RFS, DSS and OS were 66%, 92%, and 70%, respectively. On Cox proportional regression analysis, no variables were associated with disease recurrence and only patient age was associated with overall survival. INTERPRETATION: : Patients with pT0N0 pathology after cystectomy have excellent outcomes with high five- and 10-year RFS, DSS and OS. However, there is still a risk of tumour recurrence in this patient population and thus postoperative surveillance is still required.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→