MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4249275963 · doi:10.3109/9780203091746-19

Partial cystectomy Yair Lotan, David A Swanson, Arthur I Sagalowsky

2008· book-chapter· en· W4249275963 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystectomyMedicineBladder cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men (6%) and the tenth most common cancer in women (2%), accounting in men for 3% of cancer deaths in the year 2004 in the US.1 On average, 15% to 30% of all patients with bladder cancer are diagnosed with muscle-invasive tumors and radical cystectomy represents the gold standard therapy.2 In an effort to reduce the morbidity of radical cystectomy, attempts have been made to utilize bladder-preserving therapy such as aggressive transurethral resection (TUR) followed by combined chemotherapy/radiotherapy or partial cystectomy. The advantage of partial cystectomy over TUR is that it allows for complete pathologic staging of the tumor and pelvic lymph nodes with preservation of normal bladder and sexual function. The popularity of this procedure peaked in the 1950s and 1960s, but reports in the 1970s emphasized the problems, particularly high recurrence rates. Unfortunately, partial cystectomy virtually disappeared thereafter, despite the fact that good results are possible, even with T2 and T3 tumors. Many of the recurrences were due, not to incomplete removal of tumor, but to the appearance of new tumors, suggesting that patient selection is critically important to the potential for success of partial cystectomy.3-7 Although partial cystectomy can be performed when adequate transurethral biopsy cannot be confidently performed because of location or other considerations, and it may be appropriate as palliative therapy in highly selected patients instead of radical cystectomy, our discussion in this chapter will focus on its potential to provide definitive therapy for transitional carcinoma of the bladder. Indications As stated, the most important factor in performing a successful partial cystectomy is proper patient selection. Bladder cancer is an aggressive disease that places the entire urothelium at risk. Once it metastasizes, treatment options such as radical cystectomy, radiotherapy, and systemic chemotherapy do not significantly change the overall survival rates.8,9 Accordingly, the best opportunity to cure patients of their disease is offering the appropriate treatment at the start of therapy. In fact, a review of the literature concluded that only 5.8% to 18.9% of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer were suited for partial cystectomy, and that would be considered too permissive by many.10 Another study evaluating initial management of all stages of bladder cancer in Canada found that only 3.5% of cases underwent partial cystectomy or open excision as their initial treatment.11 At The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center,

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→