MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136470067 · doi:10.1183/09031936.00000811

Predicting survival in malignant mesothelioma

2011· article· en· W2136470067 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur W. Musk, Nola Olsen, H. Alfonso, Alison Reid, Robin Mina, Peter Franklin, Jan Sleith, Neel Hammond, Tim Threlfall, Κ.B. Shilkin, Nicholas de Klerk

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMesotheliomaInterquartile rangePeritoneal mesotheliomaHazard ratioAsbestosInternal medicineProportional hazards modelCancer registryDiseaseSurvival analysisSurgeryCancerPathologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) of the pleura or peritoneum is a universally fatal disease attracting an increasing range of medical interventions and escalating healthcare costs. Changes in survival and the factors affecting survival of all patients ever diagnosed with MM in Western Australia over the past five decades and confirmed by the Western Australian Mesothelioma Registry to December 2005 were examined. Sex, age, date and method of diagnosis, site of disease and histological type were recorded. Date of onset of symptoms and performance status were obtained from clinical notes for a sample of cases. Cox regression was used to examine the association of the clinical variables and the 10-yr periods of disease onset with survival after diagnosis. Survival was inversely related to age, being worse for males (hazard ratio (HR) 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6), and those with peritoneal mesothelioma (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7). Patients with sarcomatoid histology had worse prognosis than patients with epithelioid and biphasic histological subtypes. Survival improved after the 1970s and has made incremental improvements since then. Median (interquartile range) survival by decade, from 1960 until 2005, was 64 (0-198), 177 (48-350), 221 (97-504), 238 (108-502) and 301 (134-611) days; ~4 weeks of this apparent improvement can be attributed to earlier diagnosis. With increasing resources and treatment costs for MM over the past 40 yrs, there have been modest improvements in survival but no complete remissions.

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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations116
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207