The effect of radical cystectomy on survival in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To test the effect of radical cystectomy (RC) with chemotherapy vs only chemotherapy on overall mortality (OM) in metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder (mUCUB). METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry (2004-2016), we identified patients with mUCUB. Stratification was made according to treatment: RC with chemotherapy vs only chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox regression models were used before and after 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Of 2414 patients with mUCUB, 500 (21.0%) vs 1914 (79.0%) were treated with RC with chemotherapy vs only chemotherapy, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression models, RC with chemotherapy was associated with lower OM in the overall cohort (hazard ratio [HR], 0.5; P < .001), after 1:1 PS matching (HR, 0.5; P < .001), after IPTW (HR, 0.5; P < .001) and after accounting for number and location of metastases (HR, 0.5; P < .001). However, higher overall survival after RC with chemotherapy was only observed in patients with one metastatic site (21 vs 16 months; P = .001). CONCLUSION: In contemporary patients with mUCUB, RC with chemotherapy is associated with lower OM rates, relative to chemotherapy alone, but only in patients with a single metastatic site. These individuals accounted for the vast majority of patients in whom an RC was performed, despite the presence of metastatic disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".