MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prognostic significance of mesenteric tumor nodules in patients with stage III colorectal cancer

2006· article· en· W2296869626 on OpenAlexaff
Dorothy S. Lo, Aaron Pollett, Steven Gallinger, Lillian L. Siu, Ronald L. Burkes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerPerforationInternal medicineLymphovascular invasionGastroenterologyMesenteryRadiation therapyAbdominoperineal resectionChemotherapyAdjuvant therapyRadiologyMetastasisOncologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3566 Background: Tumor nodules are occasionally found in adjacent mesentery of colorectal cancer specimens, but their prognostic significance is unclear. According to the TNM staging system, mesenteric nodules are classified as part of T or N categories, but clinically they are regarded to reflect a worse prognosis, more like M1. We investigated the clinical significance of mesenteric tumor nodules. Methods: We reviewed 786 patients with stage III colorectal cancer referred between 1995 and 1999. We standardized TNM staging by assigning N status based on number of definite lymph nodes. Mesenteric nodules were considered separately and not assigned to T or N categories. Survival analyses were performed. Results: Mesenteric tumor nodules were found in 116 patients (14.8%); 48 with colon cancer (41.4%) and 68 rectal cancer (58.6%). Mean age at surgery was 62.8±1.0 yrs (SE), and the male: female ratio was 1.2. All tumors were adenocarcinomas with an average size of 4.3±0.1 cm, and the majority were moderately differentiated. Resection margins were clear except in 7 cases. With respect to high risk features, 6 cases (5.2%) had bowel perforation, 12 (10.3%) obstructive symptoms, 41 (35.3%) lymphovascular invasion, and 11 (9.5%) were T4 lesions. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given to 84.8% of colon cancer patients. Two (2.9%) rectal cancer patients received neoadjuvant chemo-radiation, and 63 (92.6%) received adjuvant therapy; chemotherapy, radiation or both. In the cohort with mesenteric nodules, the median time to progression was 23.1 months; the median 5-yr disease free survival was 35%; and the median overall survival (OS) was 47.9 months, with 44% OS at 5 yrs. After TNM standardization, 19 (16.4%) patients were down-staged to either stage I or II, and their 5-yr OS was 60% (SEER Stage II 5 yr survival 82.5%). In the remaining cohort-patients with stage III disease after standardization, the 5-yr OS was 40% (SEER 5yr survival Stage IIIc 44.3%; Stage IV 8.1%). Conclusions: In comparison to SEER survival data, the presence of mesenteric nodules appears to worsen prognosis of any T/N0 disease to that of overall stage III disease. Patients with mesenteric nodules in the setting of any T/N1+ disease had prognosis similar to that of stage IIIC disease, but their prognosis was better than M1 disease. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207