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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric O. Then, Michell Lopez, Saad Saleem, Vijay Gayam, Tagore Sunkara, Andrea Culliford, Vinaya Gaduputi

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.012
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations320
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207