MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Large retroperitoneal lymph nodes (RPLN) as a predictor for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients (pts) with germ cell tumor (GCT) receiving first-line chemotherapy (chemo).

2012· article· en· W2589977168 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Tran, Malcolm J. Moore, Eitan Amir, Michael A.S. Jewett, Lynn Anson‐Cartwright, Jeremy Sturgeon, Peter Chung, Padraig Warde, Philippe L. Bédard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCohortUnivariate analysisChemotherapySurgeryOncologyMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

332 Background: VTE causes significant morbidity and mortality in GCT pts. While an existing and validated predictive model identifies VTE risk in chemo pts with any cancer (Khorana model), a predictive model specific to GCT does not exist. Many GCT pts present with bulky RPLN that produce venous stasis in the lower extremities. The objective of this study was to explore the association between large RPLN and VTE in GCT pts receiving chemo and compare large RPLN as a predictor for VTE in GCT pts to the non-GCT specific Khorana model. Methods: Clinical data from our institutional GCT database was complemented by review of radiology, pharmacy and medical records. All GCT pts receiving 1st line chemo between 1-Jan-00 and 31-Dec-10 were included. Large RPLN were defined as ≥5cm in maximal diameter. Factors used in the Khorana model (baseline BMI, hemoglobin, white cell count and platelets) were collected. We compared the predictive accuracy of large RPLN versus Khorana score ≥3 using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve statistical analyses. Results: The cohort consisted of 260 GCT pts, median age 31.5 years, predominantly testis primary (235, 90%) and good risk (171, 66%). 17 (7%) developed VTE prior to the start of chemo. 19 (7%) were given prophylactic anticoagulation, none of whom developed VTE. Of the remaining 224 pts, 20 (9%) developed VTE during chemo. In a univariate analysis, large RPLN was strongly associated with VTE (OR 7.74, p<0.001), as were Khorana score ≥3 (OR 9.81, p<0.001) and hospital admission during chemo (OR 3.96, p=0.004). ROC curve analyses demonstrated large RPLN was a significant individual predictor for VTE (AUC 0.588, p=0.03), however, Khorana score ≥3 was a better predictor (AUC 0.664, p=0.02). Adding large RPLN to create a modified Khorana score provided marginal gains (AUC 0.682, p=0.02). Conclusions: Although large RPLN at diagnosis predicts for VTE in GCT pts, the Khorana predictive model is superior. Given the high rate of VTE in GCT pts receiving chemo, we recommend prophylactic anticoagulation for pts at increased risk, including pts with Khorana score ≥3, pts requiring hospital admission or pts with large RPLN.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.385
Teacher spread0.346 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicTesticular diseases and treatments→French-language works237,207→