MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cause of Death in Patients With Well‐Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma

2001· article· en· W2111987041 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nigel Beasley, Paul G. Walfish, Ian Witterick, Jeremy L. Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThyroid carcinomaCarcinomaStage (stratigraphy)ThyroidCause of deathRetrospective cohort studyFollicular carcinomaSurgeryPapillary carcinomaInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to examine in detail patients dying of well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review with follow-up. METHODS: Data were collected from 522 consecutive cases of differentiated thyroid carcinoma treated by one endocrinologist and four surgeons at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from 1964 to 1999. RESULTS: Ten patients died as a direct result of thyroid carcinoma; 19 other deaths were unrelated. Five of 102 patients were men (5%) and 5 of 420 were women (1%); the median age at diagnosis was 68.5 years (range, 49-82 y). No cases were stage I; three, stage II; two, stage III; and five, stage IV. Pathologically papillary carcinoma was found in six of the patients who died, follicular carcinoma in three patients, and Hurtle cell carcinoma in one patient. The causes of death were local invasion or compression of the trachea in two cases and distant metastases in eight patients. Median survival was 3.5 years (range, 1 mo-20 y). CONCLUSIONS: All patients dying of well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma had neck nodes, extrathyroidal spread, or distant metastases at presentation and were older than 49 years of age. Many presented because of their distant metastases. Death resulting from local disease was unusual, with most patients dying of distant metastases.

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)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LaryngoscopeSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207