MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Standard of care for MIBC is becoming more standard.

2017· article· en· W2890455003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelly L Miller, Heidar Albandar, David Key, John J. Haluschak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyBladder cancerRegimenGuidelineChemotherapyCisplatinChemotherapy regimenStage (stratigraphy)CancerInternal medicineOncologySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e16011 Background: Despite consensus guideline recommendations, the management of muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) varies dependent on institution setting. The risk of recurrence of localized bladder cancer after cystectomy is substantial and associated with stage. The current standard of care for possibly T2 and certainly T3-T4 MIBC is neoadjuvant cisplatin (NAC) based chemotherapy followed by cystectomy. As recent as 2011, only 12% of patients in this category actually received NAC (Feifer et al. 2011). Similar statistics have been confirmed in the US and Canada. Given there is a 13% reduction in risk of death with use of NAC, the adherence to this recommendation needs to improve. We hypothesize that in a multispecialty community practice where barriers to care are reduced that the percentage of eligible patients receiving NAC is significantly higher than previously reported. Methods: After IRB exemption obtained, patients from 2012-2015 with MIBC who underwent cystectomy were examined. Data collection included age, sex, date of consultation, dates and type of chemotherapy received, eGFR, date of surgery and surgical pathology report staging. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro-Wilk, Mann-Whittney and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests. Results: The average patient age was 69 years old with a male predominance. Approximately 54% of patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy; however, three of those patients did not receive the recommended cisplatin based regimen. Fifty percent of patients received NAC and 57% of cisplatin eligible (age < 80, eGFR > 30) patients received NAC. The average time to cystectomy was 171 days among those receiving NAC, with a decrease in time to cystectomy correlating with age. Conclusions: In a community group practice, adherence to standard of care recommendations for higher stage MIBC patients to receive NAC are significantly higher than recently reported values, 50% vs 12%, respectfully. This was achieved while maintaining acceptable time to cystectomy. This supports our hypothesis that when barriers to care are decreased in a community group practice, high quality standards of care can be effectively delivered. In the future, 5 year overall survival will also be important to evaluate in this population.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.024

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→