MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013311028 · doi:10.14740/wjon1254

Esophageal Cancer: An Updated Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Database Analysis

2020· article· en· W3013311028 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdenocarcinomaHazard ratioCancerSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End ResultsEpidemiologyInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)Stage (stratigraphy)Confidence intervalEsophageal cancerOncologyCarcinomaGastroenterologyCancer registry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths and the eighth most common cancer worldwide with a 5-year survival rate of less than 25%. Here we report the incidence, risk factors and treatment options that are available currently, and moving into the future. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database made available by the National Cancer Institute in the USA. Specifically we extracted data from the years 2004 - 2015. RESULTS: In total we identified 23,804 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and 13,919 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Males were at an increased risk of developing both types of esophageal cancer when compared to females. Most cases of adenocarcinoma were diagnosed as poorly differentiated grade III (42%), and most cases of squamous cell carcinoma were diagnosed as moderately differentiated grade II (39.5%). The most common stage of presentation for both adenocarcinoma (36.9%) and squamous cell (26.8%) carcinoma was stage IV. The worst outcomes for adenocarcinoma were noted with grade III tumors (hazard ratio (HR): 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.44 - 1.68, P value: < 0.01), stage IV tumors (HR: 3.58, 95% CI: 3.33 - 3.85, P value: < 0.01) and those not treated with surgery (HR: 2.54, 95% CI: 2.44 - 2.65, P value: < 0.01). For squamous cell carcinoma, the worst outcomes were noted with grade III tumors (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.23 - 1.49, P value: < 0.01), stage IV tumors (HR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.94 - 2.32, P value: <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma in the USA is steadily on the rise. Conversely, the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma has been continually declining. While white males had an increased incidence of both types of esophageal cancer, a higher proportion of African Americans suffered from squamous cell carcinoma. Despite the wide spread use of proton pump inhibitors, adenocarcinoma continues to be a major public health concern.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.340 · 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