Prognostic Value of Tissue Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Expression in Bladder Cancer: a Meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The prognostic role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in bladder cancer remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to explore any association between overexpression and survival outcomes. METHODS: We systematically searched for studies investigating the relationships between VEGF expression and outcome of bladder cancer patients. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. After careful review, survival data were extracted from eligible studies. A meta-analysis was performed to generate combined hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS: A total of 1,285 patients from 11 studies were included in the analysis. Our results showed that tissue VEGF overexpression in patients with bladder cancer was associated with poor prognosis in terms of OS (HR, 1.843; 95% CI, 1.231-2.759; P = 0.003), DFS (HR, 1.498; 95% CI, 1.255-1.787; P = 0.000) and DSS (HR, 1.562; 95% CI, 0.996-1.00; P = 0.052), though the difference for DSS was not statistically significant. In addition, there was no evidence of publication bias as suggested by Begg's and Egger's tests except for DFS (Begg's test, P = 0.221; Egger's test, P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis indicated elevated VEGF expression to be associated with a poor prognosis in patients with bladder cancer.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it