Change in treatment modality and trends in survival among stage I non-small cell lung cancer patients: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A number of treatment modalities are available to patients with early non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but there is inconsistency regarding their effects on survival. The associated survival of each treatment modality is crucial for patients in making informed treatment decisions. We aimed to examine the change in treatment modality and trends in survival for patients with stage I NSCLC and assess the association between treatment modality and survival. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with stage I NSCLC in the Canadian province of Ontario between 2007 and 2015 were included in this population-based study. We used a flexible parametric model to estimate the trends in survival rate. RESULTS: Overall, 11,910 patients were identified of which 7,478 patients (62.8%) received surgical resection and 2,652 (22.3%) radiation only. The proportion of patients who received radiation only increased from 13.2% in 2007 to 28.0% in 2015 (P-for-trend <0.001). Survival increased for all treatment modalities from 2007 to 2015. The increase in 5-year survival was more than 20% for all surgical groups and more than 35% for radiation-only group. CONCLUSIONS: The survival of patients with stage I NSCLC increased for all treatment modalities over the study period, most distinctly in elderly patients, which coincided with a rise in the use of radiation therapy. While surgical resection was associated with the best chance of 5-year survival, radiation therapy is a safe and effective treatment for medically inoperable patients with early 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 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".