Clinical outcomes following laparoscopic management of pT3 renal masses: A large, multi-institutional cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We described the clinical and oncological outcomes of patients treated by laparoscopic surgery for non-metastatic pT3 renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: We queried a multi-institutional database for patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pathological T3 RCC from 13 Canadian centres treated laparoscopically (radical or partial nephrectomy) between 2008 and 2014. Clinical and pathological outcomes were evaluated. Progression was defined as the development of recurrence or metastatic disease. Log-rank testing and Kaplan-Meier statistical methods assessed for differences and estimated progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In total, 176 patients were identified with a median age of 64 years. The median tumour size was 7.0 cm. Pre-clinical stage was cT1 to cT4 in 39%, 28%, 30% and 3%, respectively. The median blood loss was 150 mL (range: 0-6000) and the median operative time was 124 minutes (range: 60-360). Most lesions were clear cell RCC (80%). After a median follow-up of 17.6 months (range: 0.2-75.0), disease progression occurred in 26% (46/176) of patients, consisting of local recurrence in 7% (3/46), and metastatic disease in 93% (43/46). The 3-year PFS was 67%, with a median PFS of 49 months. Of those who progressed, the median time to progression was 10.3 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest cohort of pT3 RCC patients treated laparoscopically in the literature and suggests that for properly selected patients, laparoscopic management of locally advanced renal masses yields acceptable short-term oncological outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".