MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220909779 · doi:10.3390/cancers14071781

Pentafecta for Radical Nephroureterectomy in Patients with High-Risk Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Proposal for Standardization of Quality Care Metrics

2022· article· en· W4220909779 on OpenAlexaff
Frederik König, Nico C. Grossmann, Francesco Soria, David D’Andrea, Tristan Juvet, Aaron M. Potretzke, Hooman Djaladat, Alireza Ghoreifi, Eiji Kikuchi, Nozomi Hayakawa, Andrea Mari, Z. Khene, Kazutoshi Fujita, Jay D. Raman, Alberto Breda, Matteo Fontana, John P. Sfakianos, John Pfail, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Paweł Rajwa, Maximilian Pallauf, Giovanni Cacciamani, Thomas van Doeveren, Joost L. Boormans, Alessandro Antonelli, Marcus Jamil, Firas Abdollah, Jeffrey Budzyn, Guillaume Ploussard, Axel Heidenreich, Siamak Daneshmand, Stephen A. Boorjian, Morgan Rouprêt, Michael Rink, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Benjamin Pradère

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsLions Gate Hospital
FundersEuropean Association of Urology
KeywordsStandardizationUrothelial carcinomaMedicineUrologyQuality (philosophy)OncologyGeneral surgeryInternal medicineComputer scienceCancerBladder cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Measuring quality of care indicators is important for clinicians and decision making in health care to improve patient outcomes. Objective: The primary objective was to identify quality of care indicators for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and to validate these in an international cohort treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). The secondary objective was to assess the factors associated with failure to validate the pentafecta. Design: We performed a retrospective multicenter study of patients treated with RNU for EAU high-risk (HR) UTUC. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Five quality indicators were consensually approved, including a negative surgical margin, a complete bladder-cuff resection, the absence of hematological complications, the absence of major complications, and the absence of a 12-month postoperative recurrence. After multiple imputations and propensity-score matching, log-rank tests and a Cox regression were used to assess the survival outcomes. Logistic regression analyses assessed predictors for pentafecta failure. Results: Among the 1718 included patients, 844 (49%) achieved the pentafecta. The median follow-up was 31 months. Patients who achieved the pentafecta had superior 5-year overall- (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) compared to those who did not (68.7 vs. 50.1% and 79.8 vs. 62.7%, respectively, all p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, achieving the pentafecta was associated with improved recurrence-free survival (RFS), CSS, and OS. No preoperative clinical factors predicted a failure to validate the pentafecta. Conclusions: Establishing quality indicators for UTUC may help define prognosis and improve patient care. We propose a pentafecta quality criteria in RNU patients. Approximately half of the patients evaluated herein reached this endpoint, which in turn was independently associated with survival outcomes. Extended validation is needed.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207