MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251250940 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.02.1561

1714 COMPARISON OF MOLECULAR MARKERS, SUB-STAGE AND THE EORTC RISK-SCORE TO PREDICT CLINICAL OUTCOME OF PT1 BLADDER CANCER

2010· article· en· W4251250940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bas van Rhijn, Theodorus van der Kwast, Bharati Bapat, Peter J. Boström, Neil Fleshner, Madelon van der Aa, Liyang Liu, Chris Bangma, Michael Jewett, Ellen C. Zwarthoff, Alexandre R. Zlotta

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBladder cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerGerontologyDemographyLibrary scienceInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyBladder Cancer: Invasive/Metastatic Disease II1 Apr 20101714 COMPARISON OF MOLECULAR MARKERS, SUB-STAGE AND THE EORTC RISK-SCORE TO PREDICT CLINICAL OUTCOME OF PT1 BLADDER CANCER Bas van Rhijn, Theo van der Kwast, Bharati Bapat, Peter Bostrom, Neil Fleshner, Madelon van der Aa, Liyang Liu, Chris Bangma, Michael Jewett, Ellen Zwarthoff, and Alexandre Zlotta Bas van RhijnBas van Rhijn Toronto, Canada , Theo van der KwastTheo van der Kwast Toronto, Canada , Bharati BapatBharati Bapat Toronto, Canada , Peter BostromPeter Bostrom Toronto, Canada , Neil FleshnerNeil Fleshner Toronto, Canada , Madelon van der AaMadelon van der Aa Rotterdam, Netherlands , Liyang LiuLiyang Liu Toronto, Canada , Chris BangmaChris Bangma Rotterdam, Netherlands , Michael JewettMichael Jewett Toronto, Canada , Ellen ZwarthoffEllen Zwarthoff Rotterdam, Netherlands , and Alexandre ZlottaAlexandre Zlotta Toronto, Canada View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.02.1561AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES We evaluated the impact of sub-stage, clinico-pathological parameters and 4 molecular markers on the clinical outcome of primary pT1 bladder cancer (BC) treated with BCG. METHODS The slides of 129 primary BC from Rotterdam, NL (n=60) and Toronto, Canada (n=69) were reviewed and the pT1 diagnosis was confirmed. Sub-staging was done in two separate rounds, using a new system, i.e. pT1micro-invasive (pT1m) and pT1extensive-invasive (pT1e) 1, and according to invasion of the muscularis mucosae (pT1a/pT1b/pT1c). Uni- and multivariate analyses for recurrence and progression were performed with clinical- (size, multiplicity, hospital, gender, age), pathological- (sub-stage, CIS, grade1973 & 2004) and molecular markers (FGFR3 mutation and MIB-1, P53, P27 expression). EORTC risk-scores for recurrence and progression were calculated. 2 RESULTS Median follow-up was 6.5 years (range 0.3-21.6), 24/129 patients were female. CIS was found in 45 (35%) cases. The EORTC score for recurrence was intermediate in 122/129 (95%), 7 cases were high risk. The EORTC score for progression was intermediate in 16 cases, 113/129 (88%) were high risk. Forty-two patients remained recurrence-free (33%). Progression to pT2 or metastasis was observed in 38 (30%) patients. Sub-stage was as follows: 40 pT1m and 89 pT1e; 79 pT1a, 17 pT1b and 33 pT1c. We found 37 FGFR3 mutations and aberrant expression of MIB-1, P53 and P27 was found in 85, 69 and 48 BCs, respectively. Significant in univariate analysis for recurrence were multiplicity (P<.001) and CIS (P=.026). In multivariate analysis for recurrence, multiplicity (P<.001, RR 2.0, 95%CI: 1.4-3.0) was the only significant variable. Significant in univariate analysis for progression were gender (P=.036), substage (m/e) (P=.004), substage (a/b/c) (P=.009), CIS (P=.029), FGFR3 (P=.031), MIB-1 (P=.034), P27 (P=.048), MIB-1/P27 (P=.012), FGFR3/MIB-1 (P=.033) and FGFR3/P27 (P=.018). In multivariate analysis for progression, female gender (P=.014, RR 2.7, 95%CI: 1.3-5.8), sub-stage (m/e) (P=.003, RR 2.8, 95%CI: 1.4-5.7) and CIS (P=.015, RR 2.1, 95%CI: 1.2-4.0) were the significant variables. Grade and the EORTC risk-scores were never significant. CONCLUSIONS Multiplicity was the strongest predictor of recurrence while CIS, female gender and sub-stage (pT1m / pT1e) 1 were the most important variables for progression in pT1 bladder cancer. The additional value of molecular markers was modest. The value of the EORTC risk-score was limited. References 1 Hum Pathol2005; 36: 981. Google Scholar 2 Eur Urol2008; 54: 303. Google Scholar © 2010 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 183Issue 4SApril 2010Page: e662 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2010 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Bas van Rhijn Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Theo van der Kwast Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Bharati Bapat Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Peter Bostrom Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Neil Fleshner Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Madelon van der Aa Rotterdam, Netherlands More articles by this author Liyang Liu Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Chris Bangma Rotterdam, Netherlands More articles by this author Michael Jewett Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Ellen Zwarthoff Rotterdam, Netherlands More articles by this author Alexandre Zlotta Toronto, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207