MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134072224 · doi:10.1002/cam4.3805

Population‐based analysis of perioperative chemotherapy use, interventions requiring hospitalization and atheroembolic events among patients with non‐metastatic muscle‐invasive bladder cancer

2021· article· en· W3134072224 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tarik Benidir, Jaime O. Herrera‐Cáceres, Christopher J.D. Wallis, Katherine Lajkosz, Neil Fleshner

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeBladder cancerChemotherapyMultivariate analysisInternal medicineUnivariate analysisPopulationCancerSurgeryOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) in muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is increasingly recognized as standard of care but trends of use in Ontario remain unknown. Currently, there remains knowledge gaps regarding the effects of perioperative chemotherapy on the rates of interventions requiring hospitalization (IRH) and atheroembolic events (ATEs). METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective study within the province of Ontario over 16 years. Patients with non-metastatic MIBC receiving surgery only or planned for perioperative chemotherapy were included. Primary outcomes included 2-year IRH and ATE rates. Univariate/multivariate analysis was used to identify predictors associated with IRHs and ATEs. Cochrane-Armitage was used to assess treatment trends over time. RESULTS: Our study included 3281 patients. RC alone occurred in 2030 (60.9%), NC in 974 (29.6%) and adjuvant chemotherapy in 8.4% (n = 277). A total of 490/974 (50.3%) patients whom initiated NC with RC intent failed to undergo RC. This improved to 20.5% by 2015 (p < 0.001). Use of NC increased by an absolute value of 33% (p < 0.001). Overall, 4.2% of patients experienced IRHs and 11.5% ATEs. On multivariate analysis, advanced age and Charlson index score (CI) were strong predictors of outcomes, not timing of perioperative chemotherapy (p < 0.05.) CONCLUSION: A total of 29.6% of MIBC patients are planned for NC with 20.5% not progressing to their surgery. Use of NC has substantially increased over time. IRHs and ATEs remain stubbornly high at 4.2% and 11.5% respectively. Older age and higher CI scores are the strongest predictors of IRHs and ATEs (p < 0.05), not perioperative chemotherapy.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207