Association of Preoperative Anemia and Perioperative Allogenic Red Blood Cell Transfusion with Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We investigated whether preoperative anemia and perioperative blood transfusion (pbt) are associated with overall survival and recurrence-free survival in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: From 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2014, 1003 patients with primary colorectal cancer were enrolled in the study. Perioperative clinical and oncologic outcomes were analyzed based on the presence of preoperative anemia and pbt. Results: Preoperative anemia was found in 468 patients (46.7%). In the anemia and no-anemia groups, pbt was performed in 44% and 15% of patients respectively. Independent predictors for pbt were preoperative anemia, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, laparotomy, lengthy operative time, advanced TNM stage, T4 stage, and 30-day morbidity. The use of pbt, but not preoperative anemia, was found to be an independent adverse prognostic factor for overall survival. In terms of recurrence-free survival, the presence of preoperative anemia was similarly not a significant prognostic factor, but the use of pbt was an independent factor for an unfavourable prognosis. Conclusions: The use of pbt, but not preoperative anemia, was independently associated with worse overall and recurrence-free survival in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer. For better oncologic outcomes, our findings indicate a need to reduce the use of blood transfusion during the perioperative period.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".