The influence of total mesorectal excision on local recurrence and survival in rectal cancer patients: A population‐based study in greater Amsterdam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To determine retrospectively in a population-based setting, the influence of the introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) on local recurrence and survival in patients with rectal carcinoma. METHODS: All rectal carcinomas diagnosed during 1988-1991 (979 patients, conventional surgery with blunt dissection of the rectum) and 1998-2000 (890 patients, TME resection) were selected from the Amsterdam Cancer Registry. For all patients who underwent a macroscopically radical resection in the absence of distant dissemination, information on the occurrence of local recurrent disease and distant metastasis was collected. RESULTS: The cumulative 5-year recurrence rate decreased significantly from 20% for patients diagnosed in 1988-1991 to 11% in 1998-2000. Stage (T-category, nodal status), period of diagnosis (conventional surgery vs. TME resection), radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were independent variables of local recurrence in multivariate analysis. There was a non-significant trend for improved 5-year relative survival for all rectal carcinoma cases from 52% (95% CI 48-55) for patients diagnosed in 1988-1991 to 59% (95% CI 55-63) in 1998-2000. CONCLUSIONS: A significant decrease in local recurrence and a trend for improved relative survival were observed. The broad introduction of TME and the shift towards preoperative radiotherapy are the most plausible explanations for these observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".