MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204951365 · doi:10.1097/spc.0000000000000573

The emerging treatment landscape of advanced urothelial carcinoma

2021· article· en· W3204951365 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityMcMaster UniversityJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrothelial carcinomaDiseaseChemotherapyTargeted therapyUrothelial cancerMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is one of the most common malignancies in the Western world. Historically, patients with advanced disease have had a poor prognosis and progress within months of completing upfront platinum-based chemotherapy. In the last two years, the treatment landscape for metastatic UC (mUC) has significantly shifted with the emergence of contemporary immunotherapy and targeted agents. The purpose of this review is to highlight the current and emerging systemic treatment options for mUC of the bladder. RECENT FINDINGS: PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated activity in the postplatinum and platinum-ineligible settings. Additionally, they have become a standard maintenance treatment option after avelumab demonstrated increased overall survival in patients with stable disease or better after first line platinum-based chemotherapy. Novel targeted therapies and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have been granted Food and Drug Administration approval for subsequent line therapy based on promising results in phase II and III trials. SUMMARY: There has been a considerable increase in the variety of effective therapies for mUC, including the utility of ICIs, novel targeted agents, and ADCs. Platinum-based chemotherapy remains an effective first-line option. As the role of novel therapies continues to shift toward earlier in the disease course, there remains an important need to develop feasible, globally accessible predictive biomarkers that can aid in patient selection and inform sequencing of therapeutic options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Supportive and Palliative CareSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207