MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk of secondary sarcoma after abdominopelvic cancer treatment: Results from a contemporary cohort.

2020· article· en· W3007448899 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda Hird, Rano Matta, Diana Magee, Girish S. Kulkarni, Ronald Kodama, Sender Herschorn, Robert K. Nam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcomaHazard ratioCohortInternal medicineCancerPopulationPerioperativeRetrospective cohort studyRadical surgerySurgeryOncologyPathologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

317 Background: Our objective was to explore the risk of sarcoma in a large cohort of patients with localized abdominopelvic cancer treated with radiotherapy (RT) compared to surgery. The risk of other secondary non-sarcoma solid organ tumors was also explored. Methods: This is a population-based retrospective cohort study examining the risk of sarcoma in patients with localized prostate, bladder, colorectal, cervical, uterine, and testis cancer between January 1, 2002-December 31, 2016. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to compare time from primary treatment (radical surgery or RT) to second cancer, adjusting for age, comorbidity, income quintile, and rurality, accounting for death as a competing risk. The standardized incidence rate (SIR) was calculated as the ratio of the observed divided by the age- and sex-stratified expected number of sarcoma cases from the Ontario population. Results: 173,580 patients were included (79,662 underwent surgery and 93,918 underwent RT). Most patients had genitourinary (51.4%) or colorectal cancer (39.9%) and 24.4% received chemotherapy. Overall, 332 sarcomas developed over a median 5.7 years (IQR: 2.2-8.9) and were more common in the RT group (239/93918 [0.3%]) compared to the surgery group (93/79662 [0.1%], p<0.001). RT exposure (unadjusted HR=2.67, 95%CI:2.10-3.40, p<0.001, adjusted HR=2.59, 95%CI:2.03-3.31, p<0.001) and perioperative chemotherapy use (HR=1.31, 95%CI:1.03-1.69, p=0.038) were associated with an increased relative rate of sarcoma. Patients who received RT had an increased risk of sarcoma compared to the general population (SIR=1.46, 95%CI:1.12-1.90, p=0.005). For our secondary outcome, patients who received RT had an increased hazard of developing a second non-sarcoma solid malignancy compared to patients who underwent surgery (HR=1.16, 95%CI:1.10-1.22, p<0.001). Conclusions: This is the largest cohort investigating sarcoma in patients with abdominopelvic cancer. Patients treated with RT have a markedly increased risk of sarcoma compared to the general population. RT was an independent risk factor for sarcoma and non-sarcoma second malignancy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207