MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099281373 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.032

Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Native and Allograft Kidneys of Renal Transplant Recipients

2011· article· en· W2099281373 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Leveridge, Mireía Musquera, Andrew Evans, Carl J. Cardella, York Pei, Michael A.S. Jewett, Michael Robinette, Antonio Finelli

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal transplantRenal cell carcinomaUrologyTransplantationKidneyInternal medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Renal cell carcinoma develops in renal transplant recipients 30 or more times more commonly than in the general population. We assessed the prevalence, histology and outcome of renal cell carcinoma in a large, single center recipient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined outcomes in patients who underwent renal transplantation at our center to determine the prevalence, histology and outcome of those in whom renal cell carcinoma developed. RESULTS: A total of 3,568 patients received a renal allograft at our institution between 1966 and 2009. A total of 45 renal cell carcinomas were diagnosed in the native kidney of 39 patients (1.1%) and in 8 (0.2%) renal cell carcinoma developed in the allograft kidney. Mean age at diagnosis was 51.6 and 48.2 years in patients with native kidney and allograft tumors, respectively. The mean interval between transplantation and the native or allograft renal cell carcinoma diagnosis was 10.6 and 12.1 years, respectively. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma was the most common tumor histology in native kidneys, diagnosed in 21 cases, while papillary renal cell carcinoma was diagnosed in 20. Five allograft tumors were papillary renal cell carcinoma and 3 were clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Native kidney tumors were managed by radical nephrectomy in 44 or by observation after biopsy. Allograft tumors were managed by transplant nephrectomy in 3 cases, radio frequency ablation in 3 and partial nephrectomy in 2. At a mean 6.6-year followup 32 patients with native kidney renal cell carcinoma were alive while 7 with allograft tumors were alive at a mean 3.6-year followup. CONCLUSIONS: Renal cell carcinoma is more prevalent in patients with renal transplantation than the general population, although the subtype distribution differs. Excellent survival is seen at more than 6 years after treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations76
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicViral-associated cancers and disordersFrench-language works237,207