MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135902771 · doi:10.1111/bju.12448

Association of diabetes mellitus and metformin use with oncological outcomes of patients with non‐muscle‐invasive bladder cancer

2013· article· en· W2135902771 on OpenAlexaff
Malte Rieken, Évanguelos Xylinas, Luis A. Kluth, Joseph J. Crivelli, James Chrystal, Talia Faison, Yair Lotan, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Harun Fajković, Marek Babjuk, Alexandra Kautzky‐Willer, Alexander Bachmann, Douglas S. Scherr, Shahrokh F. Shariat

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetforminHazard ratioInterquartile rangeInternal medicineProportional hazards modelBladder cancerDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalCancerDiseaseGastroenterologySurgeryOncologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and metformin use with prognosis and outcomes of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 1117 patients with NMIBC treated at four institutions between 1996 and 2007. Cox regression models were used to analyse the association of DM and metformin use with disease recurrence, disease progression, cancer-specific mortality and any-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of the 1117 patients, 125 (11.1%) had DM and 43 (3.8%) used metformin. Within a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 64 (22-106) months, 469 (42.0%) patients experienced disease recurrence, 103 (9.2%) experienced disease progression, 50 (4.5%) died from bladder cancer and 249 (22.3%) died from other causes. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, patients with DM who did not take metformin had a greater risk of disease recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.94, P = 0.01) and progression (HR: 2.38, 95% CI 1.40-4.06, P = 0.001) but not any-cause mortality than patients without DM. DM with metformin use was independently associated with a lower risk of disease recurrence (HR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.27-0.94, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Patients with DM and NMIBC who do not take metformin seem to be at an increased risk of disease recurrence and progression; metformin use seems to exert a protective effect with regard to disease recurrence. The mechanisms behind the impact of DM on patients with NMIBC and the potential protective effect of metformin need further elucidation.

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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations78
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207