MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997330577 · doi:10.21037/tau.2019.12.06

Capturing recurrence in urothelial carcinoma: “more than meets the eye”

2019· letter· en· W2997330577 on OpenAlexaff
Aly‐Khan A. Lalani, Sumanta K. Pal, Guru Sonpavde, Petros Grivas

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Andrology and Urology · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalignancyOncologyChemotherapyLamina propriaCisplatinBladder cancerCarcinomaUrothelial carcinomaImmune checkpointInternal medicineTargeted therapyCarcinoma in situDiseaseCancerImmunotherapyPathologyEpithelium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urothelial carcinoma is the sixth most common cancer in the United States and is a significant source of mortality worldwide (1). Bladder urothelial carcinoma is a molecularly heterogeneous malignancy that typically presents as an exophytic tumour (or flat carcinoma in situ ) confined to the mucosa or lamina propria (NMIBC); however, up to a third of patients have muscle-invasive (MIBC) and about 4% metastatic disease (mUC) at the time of diagnosis (2). While platinum-based chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of therapy for a long time, significant progress has been made recently in the treatment armamentarium of mUC, particularly with immune checkpoint and fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibition (3). For MIBC, neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy has been shown to improve overall survival and thus is considered the standard of care prior to definitive locoregional therapy (4). Given the morbidity and mortality associated with mUC, optimizing early detection of recurrence after definitive therapy remains a very important, unmet need.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Andrology and UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207