MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036051681 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321089

International trends in oesophageal cancer survival by histological subtype between 1995 and 2014

2020· article· en· W3036051681 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eileen Morgan, Isabelle Soerjomataram, Anna Gavin, Mark J. Rutherford, Piers Gatenby, Aude Bardot, Jacques Ferlay, Oliver Bucher, Prithwish De, Gerda Engholm, Christopher Jackson, Serena Kozie, Alana Little, Bjørn Møller, Lorraine Shack, Hanna Tervonen, Vicky Thursfield, Sally Vernon, Paul M. Walsh, Ryan Woods, Christian Finley, Neil D. Merrett, Dianne L. O’Connell, John V. Reynolds, Freddie Bray, Melina Arnold

Bibliographic record

VenueGut · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyMcMaster UniversityCancer Care OntarioAlberta Health ServicesAlberta Cancer FoundationSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyCancerCare Manitoba
FundersCancer Council VictoriaFiona Stanley HospitalQueen's University BelfastMcMaster UniversityPublic Health EnglandUniversity of TwenteCancer Society of New ZealandCancer Institute NSWPublic Health AgencySaskatchewan Cancer AgencyMonash UniversityPublic Health WalesMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreScottish GovernmentPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerCancer Care OntarioKræftens BekæmpelseAlberta Health ServicesCancer Council NSWWestern Sydney Local Health DistrictUniversity of OtagoWorld Health OrganizationCancer Research UKDalhousie UniversityKreftforeningenQueen's UniversityUniversity of Western SydneyNational Cancer Registry Ireland
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyCancerIncidence (geometry)AdenocarcinomaCancer survivalRelative survivalDiseaseSurvival rateInternal medicineCancer registryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Survival from oesophageal cancer remains poor, even across high-income countries. Ongoing changes in the epidemiology of the disease highlight the need for survival assessments by its two main histological subtypes, adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: December 2015, from cancer registries covering seven participating countries with similar access to healthcare (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK). 1-year and 3-year age-standardised net survival alongside incidence rates were calculated by country, subtype, sex, age group and period of diagnosis. RESULTS: 111 894 cases of AC and 73 408 cases of SCC were included in the analysis. Marked improvements in survival were observed over the 20-year period in each country, particularly for AC, younger age groups and 1 year after diagnosis. Survival was consistently higher for both subtypes in Australia and Ireland followed by Norway, Denmark, New Zealand, the UK and Canada. During 2010 to 2014, survival was higher for AC compared with SCC, with 1-year survival ranging from 46.9% (Canada) to 54.4% (Ireland) for AC and 39.6% (Denmark) to 53.1% (Australia) for SCC. CONCLUSION: Marked improvements in both oesophageal AC and SCC survival suggest advances in treatment. Less marked improvements 3 years after diagnosis, among older age groups and patients with SCC, highlight the need for further advances in early detection and treatment of oesophageal cancer alongside primary prevention to reduce the overall burden from the 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 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 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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations105
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGutSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207