Clinical outcomes and patterns of population‐based management of urachal carcinoma of the bladder: An analysis of the National Cancer Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Given the low incidence of urachal carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), there is limited published data from contemporary population-based cohorts. This study aimed to describe demographic, clinicopathological features, and survival outcomes of patients diagnosed with UCB. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2004-2016) was queried for UCB patients. Descriptive analyses characterized demographics and clinicopathologic features. We assessed 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of the entire cohort and subgroups of localized/locally advanced and metastatic disease. We utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess the association between covariates of interest and all-cause mortality and to examine the impact of surgical technique and chemotherapy. RESULTS: We identified 841 patients with UCB. The most common histologic subtype was non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (39.6%). Approximately 50% had ≥cT2 disease, and 14.3% were metastatic at diagnosis. Altogether, partial cystectomy (60%) was most performed, and lymph node dissection was performed in 377 patients (44.8%), with specific temporal increase in utilization over the study period (p < 0.001). Overall, median OS was 59 months, and 5-year OS was 49%. In patients with localized/locally advanced disease, we found no association between partial and radical cystectomy (Hazards ratio [HR] 1.75; 95% CI 0.72-4.3) as well as receipt of perioperative chemotherapy (HR 1.97, 95% CI 0.79-4.90) and outcomes. Lastly, receipt of systemic therapy was not associated with survival benefit (HR 0.785, 95% CI 0.37-1.65) in metastatic disease cohort. CONCLUSION: This large population-based cohort provides insight into the surgical management and systemic therapy, without clear evidence on the association of chemotherapy and survival in the perioperative and metastatic setting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".