A 20-Year Prospective Study of Wilms Tumor and Other Kidney Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Renal tumors are one of the most common tumors in children. We aim at evaluating the characteristics and the outcome of Wilms tumor and other malignant kidney tumors in Hong Kong. PROCEDURE: Between January 1990 to December 2010, 68 patients under the age of 18 with malignant renal tumors were diagnosed and received treatment in Hong Kong. Clinical records were updated regularly. Prognostic factors and survival rate were evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were diagnosed with Wilms tumor. The annual incidence was estimated to be 2.29 per million. The mean age was 38 months. Median follow-up was 9.2 years. The event-free survival and overall survival rate at 10 years were 85.2% and 92.6%, respectively. A pair of siblings with familial extrarenal Wilms tumor was included. Pulmonary metastasis did exhibit a significant difference in survival rate. Eight cases of clear cell sarcoma of the kidneys were reported and the survival rate was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical characteristics and outcome of the patients diagnosed Wilms tumor were comparable with other developed countries. Relatively high proportion and excellent outcome were found in clear cell sarcoma of the kidneys.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".