MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327863779 · doi:10.3109/0284186x.2016.1150608

Mortality and survival of lung cancer in Denmark: Results from the Danish Lung Cancer Group 2000–2012

2016· article· en· W2327863779 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Jakobsen, Torben Riis Rasmussen, Anders Green

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Oncologica · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerRelative survivalDanishPopulationComorbidityMortality rateCancerSurvival rateSurvival analysisCancer registryDemographySurgeryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In the 1990s outcomes in Danish lung cancer patients were poor compared with the other Nordic countries. The five-year survival was only about 5%, only 10% of patients were operated on and less than 60% received active surgical or oncologic treatment. This paper describes trends in mortality and survival of lung cancer in Denmark from 2000 to 2012. Methods The study population comprised 52 435 patients with a diagnosis of cancer of the trachea and the lung, primarily ascertained from the Danish Lung Cancer Register and grouped into three cohorts by year of diagnosis. The outcome measures covered the first year as well as the first full five-year period after diagnosis and comprised absolute mortality rate (per 100 patient years), absolute survival, and the relative survival. All outcomes were estimated for the overall patient population as well as after stratification by covariates. Results Overall, the mortality rates have declined significantly over time from 117 per 100 patient years to 88 for the one-year mortality and from 75 to 65 for the five-year mortality rates, respectively. With the exception of patients with advanced stage, declining mortality was observed for all strata by gender, comorbidity, stage and surgery status and was accompanied by corresponding improvements in both absolute and relative survival. Conclusions The mortality has been significantly declining and the prognosis correspondingly improving in lung cancer in Denmark since the turn of the millennium. As of today, survival after lung cancer in Denmark is probably in line with the international standard. Based on our results we recommend introducing mortality indicators based on all-cause mortality within the patient population in international benchmarking studies as comparisons based on cancer-specific mortality relative to the total general population may be misleading when interpreted in the context of outcomes and quality of care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations64
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa OncologicaSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207