MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917562662 · doi:10.3332/ecancer.2019.905

The use of intravesical BCG in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder

2019· review· en· W2917562662 on OpenAlexaff
Omar Alhunaidi, Alexandre R. Zlotta

Bibliographic record

Venueecancermedicalscience · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBladder cancerCystectomyCarcinoma in situDiseaseImmunotherapyMalignancyUrothelial carcinomaUrologyOncologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high recurrence and progression rates of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) have led investigators to study the use of intravesical therapy in order to prevent them. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) has been successfully used for this indication to treat NMIBC for more than four decades. BCG is the only intravesical agent shown to reduce the risk of progression of NMIBC to muscle-invasive disease. Despite over 40 years of clinical use, the precise mechanism of action for what has often been considered the most successful cancer immunotherapy in humans remains largely unknown. Unfortunately, BCG therapy is not a universal panacea and it still fails in up to 40% of patients. Many of these patients, especially in the high-risk category (T1 high-grade disease, carcinoma in situ) will require aggressive therapy like cystectomy or in selected cases, bladder-sparing options like chemo-radiation. Indeed, there is no gold standard intravesical treatment after BCG failure.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations64
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueecancermedicalscienceSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207