Association of De Ritis ratio with oncological outcomes in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The De Ritis ratio (aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase, DRR) has been linked to oncological outcomes in several cancers. We aimed to assess the association of DRR with recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1117 patients diagnosed with NMIBC originating from an established multicenter database. To define the optimal pretreatment DRR cut-off value, we determined a value of 1.2 as having a maximum Youden index value. The overall population was therefore divided into two De Ritis ratio groups using this cut-off (lower, < 1.2 vs. higher, ≥ 1.2). Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to investigate the association of DRR with RFS and PFS. The discrimination of the model was evaluated with the Harrel's concordance index (C-index). RESULTS: Overall, 405 (36%) patients had a DRR ≥ 1.2. On univariable Cox regression analysis, DRR was significantly associated with RFS (HR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.47, p = 0.03), but not with PFS (HR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.65-1.44, p = 0.9). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, which adjusted for the effect of established clinicopathologic features, DRR ≥ 1.2 remained significantly associated with worse RFS (HR:1.21, 95% CI 1.00-1.46, p = 0.04). The addition of DRR only minimally improved the discrimination of a base model that included established clinicopathologic features (C-index = 0.683 vs. C-index = 0.681). On DCA the inclusion of DRR did not improve the net-benefit of the prognostic model. CONCLUSION: Despite the statistically significant association of the DRR with RFS in patients with NMIBC, it does not seem to add any prognostic or clinical benefit beyond that of currently available clinical factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".