MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165062693 · doi:10.3390/curroncol28030181

Lung Cancer Inequalities in Stage of Diagnosis in Ontario, Canada

2021· article· en· W3165062693 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Aïsha Lofters, Evgenia Gatov, Hong Lu, Nancy N. Baxter, Sara J. T. Guilcher, Alexander Kopp, Mandana Vahabi, Geetanjali D. Datta

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsMedicineRelative riskLung cancerConfidence intervalStage (stratigraphy)CancerPoisson regressionDemographyLung cancer screeningCohortAdenocarcinomaInternal medicinePediatricsPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lung cancer is the most common cancer and cause of cancer death in Canada, with approximately 50% of cases diagnosed at stage IV. Sociodemographic inequalities in lung cancer diagnosis have been documented, but it is not known if inequalities exist with respect to immigration status. We used multiple linked health-administrative databases to create a cohort of Ontarians 40-105 years of age who were diagnosed with an incident lung cancer between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2017. We used modified Poisson regression with robust standard errors to examine the risk of diagnosis at late vs. early stage among immigrants compared to long-term residents. The fully adjusted model included age, sex, neighborhood-area income quintile, number of Aggregated Diagnosis Group (ADG) comorbidities, cancer type, number of prior primary care visits, and continuity of care. Approximately 62% of 38,788 people with an incident lung cancer from 2012 to 2017 were diagnosed at a late stage. Immigrants to the province were no more likely to have a late-stage diagnosis than long-term residents (63.5% vs. 62.0%, relative risk (RR): 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99-1.04), adjusted relative risk (ARR): 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99-1.05)). However, in fully adjusted models, people with more comorbidities were less likely to have a late-stage diagnosis (adjusted relative risk (ARR): 0.82 (95% CI: 0.80-0.84) for those with 10+ vs. 0-5 ADGs). Compared to adenocarcinoma, small cell carcinoma was more likely to be diagnosed at a late stage (ARR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.27-1.31), and squamous cell (ARR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.87-0.91) and other lung cancers (ARR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.94) were more likely to be diagnosed at an early stage. Men were also slightly more likely to have late-stage diagnosis in the fully adjusted model (ARR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.08). Lung cancer in Ontario is a high-fatality cancer that is frequently diagnosed at a late stage. Having fewer comorbidities and being diagnosed with small cell carcinoma was associated with a late-stage diagnosis. The former group may have less health system contact, and the latter group has the lung cancer type most closely associated with smoking. As lung cancer screening programs start to be implemented across Canada, targeted outreach to men and to smokers, increasing awareness about screening, and connecting every Canadian with primary care should be system priorities.

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 score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207