Clinical characteristics and prognosis of young patients with colorectal cancer in Eastern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore the clinical characteristics and prognosis of young patients with colorectal cancer patients in Eastern China. METHODS: A total of 1335 patients with colorectal cancer treated from December 1985 to December 2005 at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were studied retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups, a younger group (aged ≤ 30 years) and an older group (aged > 30 years), and comparison was made in the clinical characteristics and prognosis between the two groups. Chi-square test was used for data analysis of all categorical variables, and overall survival (OS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox model. RESULTS: There were 42 (3.1%) and 1293 (96.9%) cases in the younger group and older group, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that the 5- and 10-year OS in the younger group were 33.9% and 26.1%, respectively, and those in the older group were 60.1% and 52.2%, respectively. Younger group had poor survival (χ(2) = 14.146, P = 0.000). Multivariate analysis revealed that age was not a dependent factor for prognosis (OR = 0.866, 95%CI: 0.592-1.269, P = 0.461). Stratified analysis indicated that in stage III and IV disease, the 5- and 10-year OS were 24.6% and 14.8% in the younger group, and 40.4% and 33.3% in the older group, respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (χ(2) = 5.101, P = 0.024). In the subgroup of radical surgery, the 5- and 10-year OS were 44.3% and 34.2% in the younger group, and 69.6% and 60.5% in the older group, with a difference being significant between the two groups (χ(2) = 7.830, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Compared with older patients, the younger patients have lower survival, especially in the subgroups of stage III and IV disease and radical surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".