Bladder Conservation Treatment in the Elderly Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To report the long-term results of bladder conservation strategies in elderly patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and evaluate the different factors affecting locoregional control and patient survival. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 39 elderly patients aged 70 or older, treated with curative intent with radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy after transurethral resection of bladder for T2-T4aN0 carcinoma of the bladder. Twenty-seven men and 12 women were identified with a median age of 78 (range 70-87). Sixteen of the patients had a previous history of superficial bladder cancer. Twenty-five patients had T2 lesions, 13 patients had T3 lesions, and 1 patient had T4a lesion. The majority of patients were unsuitable for surgery because of medical reasons (67%), whereas the others refused radical cystectomy (33%). Patients were treated with radical radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 35.5 months for patients at risk, the 5-year overall survival is 28.9% for all stages, 31.9% for T2 lesions, and 26.8% for T3-T4a lesions. Significant prognostic factors for overall survival on univariate analysis were performance status and age. Five-year cause-specific survival is 37.5% for all stages, 41.5% for T2 lesions, and 34.7% for T3-T4a lesions. No significant prognostic factors for cause-specific survival were indentified on univariate analysis. Toxicity was acceptable. CONCLUSION: Younger age and good performance status were favorable prognostic factors for overall survival. Bladder conservation strategies achieved satisfactory results and were well-tolerated in this elderly population with invasive bladder cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".