MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The proportion and characterization of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who are never treated or have delayed treatment with targeted therapy: Results from a large prospective cohort.

2015· article· en· W2561651629 on OpenAlexaffabout
Param Bains, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Jennifer J. Knox, Georg A. Bjarnason, Christian Kollmannsberger, Sebastién J. Hotte, Anil Kapoor, Marie Vanhuyse, M. Neil Reaume, Piotr Czaykowski, Denis Soulières, Naveen S. Basappa, Olli Saarela, Lori Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreOttawa HospitalUniversity Health NetworkCancerCare ManitobaJuravinski Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of CalgaryBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal cell carcinomaCohortInternal medicineHazard ratioPopulationCancerProportional hazards modelKidney cancerProspective cohort studySurgeryOncologyGastroenterologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

424 Background: The proportion and characterization of patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who never start or delay starting targeted therapy (TT) is unknown. It is important to understand and characterize these pts. Methods: Data from the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) database were utilized. CKCis data were collected prospectively from 14 REB-approved academic centers in Canada. The study population included pts with mRCC managed from 2006 (when VEGFR TT became available) to 2014. Results: 920 pts met the inclusion criteria, but 67 pts had <6 months (mo) follow up and were excluded. Thus, 853 pts make up the study cohort with a median follow up of 21 mo. The cohort was divided into 3 groups: early (started TT within 6 mo), delayed (started TT after 6 mo), and never (never started TT). The groups consisted of 406 pts (47.6%), 182 pts (21.3%), and 265 pts (31.1%), respectively. In those that started TT, median time to initiation was 3.2 mo; 69% by 6 mo, 82% by 12 mo, 92% by 24 mo, and 99.7% by 5 yrs. Multiple baseline characteristics were determined, compared, and will be presented. On univariable analysis, pts never treated were older, had a longer interval from original diagnosis to metastases (mets), fewer metastatic sites, fewer liver mets, more lung-only mets, more metastectomies, and less radiation (RT). On Cox regression analysis, pts were less likely to initiate TT if they were older, had earlier year of diagnosis of mets, had metastectomy, never had RT, fewer sites of mets, and brain mets. Median survival from time of metastatic diagnosis was 1.53 yrs, 3.54 yrs, and 1.41 yrs in the early, delayed, and never treated groups, respectively. Conclusions: 31% of pts with mRCC never received TT in this cohort of pts treated in academic centers, which may underrepresent the reality in the community. Baseline characteristics in the delayed treatment group were better and likely represent a more indolent biology. More data on the untreated group will be presented as it comprises a heterogenous group of pts: potentially those lost to follow up, those treated with metastectomy, pts too ill with limited survival, and pts felt to have excellent outcomes without treatment.

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)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→