MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793774532 · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(18)32470-4

203: Effect of Surgical Margins on Cancer Control Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy. When do Margins Matter?

2006· article· en· W2793774532 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher R. Porter, Koichi Kodama, Robert P. Gibbons, Roy J. Correa, Alberto Briganti, K.-H. Felix Chun, Paul Perrotte, Pierre I. Karakiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsPQ Corporation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatectomyProstate cancerArt historyCancerHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer are typically offered aggressive treatment if they are judged likely to live for at least 1 0 years; however, physicians are illequipped to make this determination.We describe the association between the Total Illness Burden Index-Prostate Cancer (TIBI-CaP), a validated self-reported measure of comorbidities unrelated to prostate cancer, and subsequent mortality.METHODS: In October 2002 the self-reported TIBI-CaP was sent to all 4,634 men actively participating in CaPSURE, an observational cohort of prostate cancer patients.Of the 3,409 surveys (73%) returned, the TIBI-CaP summary score was calculable for 2,891 men with follow-up.Deaths were reported to the CaPSURE registry by participating physicians and next-of-kin while cause of death was obtained from death certificates. Kaplan-M~ier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regressionwere used to describe the association between the TIBI-CaP score and non-prostate cancer related (NPC) mortality.RESULTS: During the 2.5 years following administration of the TIBI-CaP, 101 men (3.5%) died of NPC causes, and 16 men died of prostate cancer (their data were censored at date of death).The mean TIBI-CaP score was 3.6±2.7 (possible range, 0-23; actual range, 0-18).Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that NPC survival at 2 years was 99% (95% Cl = 0.98-1.00) in men with TIBI-CaP scores of 0-2, but only 75% (95% Cl = 0.58-0.86) in those with TIBI-CaP scores of 2:12.After controlling for education and age, the Cox hazard ratios were 1.9 (95% Cl=1.0-3.6) for scores 3-5, 4.0 (2.1-7.7) for scores 6-8, 6.6 (3.1-14.2) for scores 9-11, and 20.0 (8.9-45.0)for scores 2:12 when compared with men whose scores were 0-2.In the multivariate model, race/ethnicity, income, marital status, and prostate cancer severity did not predict mortality.Including prostate cancer related deaths did not change the results.CONCLUSIONS: TIBI-CaP score was a strong predictor of nonprostate cancer related mortality in this cohort.This provides evidence of the clinical utility of this measure in assessing comorbidity in order to inform treatment decisions in men with prostate cancer.

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)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207