Postoperative Nomogram for Relapse-Free Survival in Patients with High Grade Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We developed a prognostic nomogram for patients with high grade urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract after extirpative surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data were available for 2,926 patients diagnosed with high grade urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract who underwent extirpative surgery. Cox proportional hazard regression models identified independent prognosticators of relapse in the development cohort (838). A backward step-down selection process was applied to achieve the most informative nomogram with the least number of variables. The L2-regularized logistic regression was applied to generate the novel nomogram. Harrell's concordance indices were calculated to estimate the discriminative accuracy of the model. Internal validation processes were performed using bootstrapping, random sampling, tenfold cross-validation, LOOCV, Brier score, information score and F1 score. External validation was performed on an external cohort (2,088). Decision tree analysis was used to develop a risk classification model. Kaplan-Meier curves were applied to estimate the relapse rate for each category. RESULTS: Overall 35.3% and 30.7% of patients experienced relapse in the development and external validation cohort. The final nomogram included age, pT stage, pN stage and architecture. It achieved a discriminative accuracy of 0.71 and 0.76, and the AUC was 0.78 and 0.77 in the development and external validation cohort, respectively. Rigorous testing showed constant results. The 5-year relapse-free survival rates were 88.6%, 68.1%, 40.2% and 12.5% for the patients with low risk, intermediate risk, high risk and very high risk disease, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current nomogram, consisting of only 4 variables, shows high prognostic accuracy and risk stratification for patients with high grade urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract following extirpative surgery, thereby adding meaningful information for clinical decision making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".