Surgical Management of Stage T1 Renal Tumors in Canadian Academic Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The proportion of patients with stage 1 renal tumours receiving partial nephrectomy is considered a quality of care indicator. The objective of this study was to characterize surgical practice patterns at Canadian academic institutions for the treatment of these tumours. METHODS: The Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System (CKCis) is a multicentre collaboration of 13 academic institutions in Canada. All patients with pathologic stage T1 renal tumours in CKCis were identified. Descriptive statistics were performed to characterize practice patterns over time. Associations between patient, tumour, and treatment factors with the use of partial nephrectomy were determined. RESULTS: From 1988 to April 2014, 1453 patients with pathologic stage 1 renal tumours were entered in the CKCis database. Of these, 977 (67%) patients had pT1a tumours; of these, 765 (78%) received partial nephrectomy. Of the total number of patients (1453), 476 (33%) had pT1b tumours; of these, 204 (43%) received partial nephrectomy. The use of partial nephrectomy increased over time from 60% to 90% for pT1a tumours and 20% to 60% for pT1b tumours. Stage pT1b (relative risk [RR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.63) and minimally invasive surgical approach (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.73-0.84 for pT1a and RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.17-0.30 for pT1b) were associated with decreased use of partial nephrectomy. Most patient factors including age, gender, body mass index, hypertension, and renal function were not significantly associated with use of partial nephrectomy (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Almost all pT1a and most pT1b renal tumours managed surgically at academic centres in Canada receive partial nephrectomy. The use of partial versus radical nephrectomy appears to occur independently of patient age and comorbid status, which may indicate that urologists are performing partial nephrectomy whenever technically feasible based on tumour factors. Although the ideal proportion patients receiving partial nephrectomy cannot be determined, treatment distribution observed in this cohort may indicate an achievable case distribution among experienced surgeons.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".