Long-term outcomes of patients with 10 or more colorectal liver metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the number of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is decreasingly considered as a contraindication to surgery, patients with 10 CLM or more are often denied liver surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the outcome after liver surgery and to identify prognostic factors of survival in such patients. METHODS: The study population consisted of a multicentre cohort of patients with CLM (N=12 406) operated on, with intention to resect, from January 2005-June 2013 and whose data were prospectively collected in the LiverMetSurvey registry. RESULTS: Overall, the group ⩾10 CLM (N=529, 4.3%) experienced a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 30%. A macroscopically complete (R0/R1) resection (72.8% of patients) was associated with a 3- and 5-year OS of 61% and 39% vs 29% and 5% for R2/no resection patients (P<0.0001). At multivariate analysis, R0/R1 resection emerged as the strongest favourable factor of OS (HR 0.35 (0.26-0.48)). Other independent favourable factors were as follows: maximal tumour size <40 mm (HR 0.67 (0.49-0.92)); age <60 years (HR 0.66 (0.50-0.88)); preoperative MRI (HR 0.65 (0.47-0.89)); and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.73 (0.55-0.98)). The model showed that 5-year OS rates of 30% was possible provided R0/R1 resection associated with at least an additional favourable factor. CONCLUSIONS: Liver resection might provide long-term survival in patients with ⩾10 CLM staged with preoperative MRI, provided R0/R1 resection followed by adjuvant therapy. A validation of these results in another cohort is needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".