MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326085161 · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31824daccb

Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism Predicts Survival in Cancer Patients

2012· article· en· W2326085161 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca C. Auer, Adena Scheer, Jakob I. McSparron, Allison R. Schulman, Scott Tuorto, Steve Doucette, Jamie Gonsalves, Yuman Fong

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeCancerContext (archaeology)Stage (stratigraphy)SurgeryRetrospective cohort studyVenous thromboembolismInternal medicineProspective cohort studyCohortThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with a worse prognosis and/or a more advanced cancer stage and to evaluate the association between a postoperative VTE and cancer-specific survival when known prognostic factors, such as age, stage, cancer type, and type of surgery, are controlled. CONTEXT: It is unknown whether oncology patients who develop a venous thromboembolism after a complete curative resection are at the same survival disadvantage as oncology patients with a spontaneous VTE. METHODS: A retrospective case control study was conducted at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Years of study: January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2005. Median follow-up: 24.9 months (Interquartile range 13.0, 43.0). All cancer patients who underwent abdominal, pelvic, thoracic, or soft tissue procedures and those who developed a VTE within 30 days of the procedure were identified from a prospective morbidity and mortality database. Overall survival (OS) was calculated for the entire cohort. In the matched cohort, OS and disease-specific survival (DSS) were calculated for stages 0 to 3 and stages 0 to 2. RESULTS: A total of 23,541 cancer patients underwent an invasive procedure and 474 (2%) had a postoperative VTE. VTE patients had a significantly worse 5-year OS compared to no-VTE patients (43.8% vs 61.2%; P < 0.0001); 205 VTE patients (stages 0-3) were matched to 2050 controls by age, sex, cancer type, stage, and surgical procedure. In this matched analysis, VTE patients continued to demonstrate a significantly worse prognosis with an inferior 5-year OS (54.7% vs 66.3%; P < 0.0001) and DSS (67.8% vs 79.5%; P = 0.0007) as compared to controls. The survival difference persisted in early stage disease (stage 0-2), with 5-year DSS of 82.9% versus 87.3% (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative VTE in oncology patients with limited disease and a complete surgical resection is associated with an inferior cancer survival. A postoperative VTE remains a poor prognostic factor, even when controlling for age, stage, cancer type, and surgical procedure further supporting an independent link between hypercoagulability and cancer survival.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations36
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207