Trends over time in survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma in the real-world: A multicenter analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
412 Background: Patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) historically have poor long-term outcomes, with nearly 50% developing metastatic disease. Similarly, patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) have had median overall survivals of less than 2 years. Novel therapies have been implemented over time in attempts to improve outcomes. This study evaluates trends in survival over time in patients with MIBC and mUC treated in the real-world setting. Methods: Retrospective data was collected from two major cancer centres in Alberta and the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Ontario, Canada. Consecutive patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy between 01/2005 and 01/2018 who had confirmed MIBC or mUC were evaluated. Patients were excluded if they had been treated as part of a clinical trial in the first-line setting. Patients were categorized based on year of diagnosis at presentation: time period 1 (T1) diagnosed between 01/2005 and 12/2011, and time period 2 (T2) diagnosed between 01/2012 and 12/2018. The co-primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) for MIBC, progression-free survival (PFS) for mUC, and overall survival (OS) for both. Results: 572 patients were included, 196 (78% male; median age 63.8 years) had MIBC and 376 (76% male; median age 68.4 years) were treated for mUC. Amongst patients with MIBC, 33% (65) were treated in T1 and 67% (131) in T2. Median DFS and OS were significantly improved in T2 compared to T1 for patients with MIBC (Table). On multivariate analysis, earlier year of diagnosis and ECOG status ≥2 was independently associated with poor outcomes (p=0.016 and p=0.008, respectively). Amongst patients with mUC, 205 (55%) were treated in T1 and 171 (45%) in T2. Median PFS and OS did not significantly improve over time in patients with mUC from T1 to T2 (Table). Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, outcomes for patients with MIBC have significantly improved over time. This is likely attributed to standardization of perioperative chemotherapy protocols and improvements in surgical techniques. Similar improvements have not yet been demonstrated for patients with mUC during the two time periods. However, novel therapies (eg. immunotherapy) were only approved in 2017. Future analysis may explore the reasons for improvement in patients with MIBC and will evaluate outcomes in mUC patients treated from 2017 onwards. CI= confidence interval, HR= hazard ratio. [Table: see text]
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".