MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206129590 · doi:10.22374/jeleu.v4i3.126

Should National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidelines Remove Urine Cytology as a Suggested Adjunct in Suspected Bladder Cancer (haematuria) Investigations?

2021· article· en· W3206129590 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Madeline Moore, Andrew Robinson, Mark Kitchen, Lyndon Gommersall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endoluminal Endourology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNiceExcellenceAdjunctMedicineCytologyUrine cytologyBladder cancerUrologyUrineGeneral surgeryCancerMedical physicsGynecologyInternal medicinePathologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Despite National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines suggesting the use of urine cytology (UC) for the diagnosis of bladder cancer, its use is variable. Reasons for this include sub-optimal sensitivity, financial cost, availability of alternative tests, and uncertainty over interpretation of results. Anecdotally, however, suspicious or malignant UC when other investigations are normal, occasionally leads to a cancer diagnosis. Therefore, we retrospectively assessed a cohort of our haematuria patients to determine the value of UC in cancer diagnosis and the clinical significance of atypical UC (graded as C3). Patients and methods We identified 3018 patients with haematuria referred on the suspected cancer pathway (“two-week wait”) in 2015. We retrospectively analysed clinical, demographic, and follow-up/outcome data in a random cohort of 500 cases. Results Median follow up was 58 months. Urological malignancy was diagnosed in 61/500 patients; all were identified by cystoscopy or imaging, i.e., irrespective of UC result. No cases of atypical UC re-presented with a ‘missed’ cancer diagnosis within the five-year follow-up period. However, suspicious and malignant cytology was associated with high-grade/aggressive tumours and subsequent tumour recurrence. Conclusion Urine cytology did not identify any cancers that were not already found by imaging or cystoscopy. Atypical UC in the presence of negative haematuria investigations does not appear to be associated with malignancy, and therefore should not alter patient management nor prompt further investigation. Suspicious and malignant UC was associated with higher risk cancers and could therefore be used to prioritise waiting lists for transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT), however, it is unclear whether this might benefit patient outcomes. We conclude therefore that UC has no role in haematuria investigations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endoluminal EndourologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207