Radical cystectomy for the treatment of T1 bladder cancer: the Canadian Bladder Cancer Network experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy may provide optimal survival outcomes in the management of clinical T1 bladder cancer. We present our data from a large, multi-institutional, contemporary Canadian series of patients who underwent radical cystectomy for clinical T1 bladder cancer in a single-payer health care system. METHODS: We collected a pooled database of 2287 patients who underwent radical cystectomy between 1993 and 2008 in 8 different centres across Canada; 306 of these patients had clinical T1 bladder cancer. Survival data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 67 years with a mean follow-up time of 35 months. The 5-year overall, disease-specific and disease-free survival was 71%, 77% and 59%, respectively. The 10-year overall and disease-specific survival were 60% and 67%, respectively. Pathologic stage distribution was p0: 32 (11%), pT1: 78 (26%), pT2: 55 (19%), pT3: 60 (20%), pT4: 27 (9%), pTa: 16 (5%), pTis: 28 (10%), pN0: 215 (74%) and pN1-3: 78 (26%). Only 12% of patients were given adjuvant chemotherapy. On multivariate analysis, only margin status and pN stage were independently associated with overall, disease-specific and disease-free survival. INTERPRETATION: These results indicate that clinical T1 bladder cancer may be significantly understaged. Identifying factors associated with understaged and/or disease destined to progress (despite any prior intravesical or repeat transurethral therapies prior to radical cystectomy) will be critical to improve survival outcomes without over-treating clinical T1 disease that can be successfully managed with bladder preservation strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".