MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093380089 · doi:10.1016/j.euros.2020.08.008

Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 Mutation as a Prognostic Indicator in Patients with Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3093380089 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Open Science · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFibroblast Growth Factor Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of OttawaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibroblast growth factor receptor 3Hazard ratioOncologyMedicineInternal medicineMeta-analysisCarcinogenesisCarcinomaBladder cancerProportional hazards modelUrothelial carcinomaCancer researchCancerConfidence intervalFibroblast growth factorReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutations have been implicated in urothelial tumorigenesis. FGFR3 inhibitors are being explored in clinical trials. We aimed to study the association between FGFR3 mutations and survival in urothelial carcinoma. We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid, and Web of Science from January 1985 to October 2018. The search terms were as follows: targeted therapies, FGFR and its subtypes, urothelial, bladder, and cancer. We included case-control or cohort studies of FGFR3 mutations in urothelial carcinoma. We included studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for outcomes comparing FGFR3 mutations with FGFR3 wild type. Two reviewers performed article selection. We assessed heterogeneity among study-specific HRs using I2 statistic. We used a random effect model to obtain HR and 95% CI for event-free survival (EFS), composed of recurrence-free and progression-free survival. Statistical tests were two sided. Eleven studies (seven retrospective and four prospective) comprising 2162 patients were included. Analysis was performed for two groups. The first group included 1651 patients with non–muscle-invasive (NMI) urothelial carcinomas (886 [53.6%] had FGFR3 mutations). Compared with FGFR3 wild type, FGFR3 mutation did not influence EFS (HR = 0.99, CI = 0.77–1.28, p = 0.96). There was no significant heterogeneity (I2 = 25%). The second group included 511 patients with NMI and muscle-invasive (MI) urothelial carcinomas (151 [30%] had FGFR3 mutations). FGFR3 mutation was not prognostic (HR = 1.54, CI = 0.41–5.81, p = 0.52). There was heterogeneity (I2 = 91%). There is no association between FGFR3 mutation and EFS in NMI urothelial carcinoma, and in NMI and MI urothelial carcinoma groups. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutation is not associated with a worse survival outcome in urothelial carcinoma. This is important as FGFR inhibitors are emerging as a new treatment option.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.280 · 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