Venous Thromboembolism in Surgically Treated Esophageal Cancer Patients: A Provincial Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. Surgery for esophageal cancer carries a high risk of VTE. This study identifies the risk factors and associated mortality of thrombotic complications among patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery. Methods All patients in the province of Ontario undergoing esophageal cancer surgery from 2007 to 2017 were identified. Logistic regression identified VTE risk factors at 90 days and 1 year postoperatively. A flexible parametric survival analysis compared mortality and survival up to 5 years after surgery for patients with and without a postoperative VTE. Results Overall 9,876 patients with esophageal cancer were identified; 2,536 (25.7%) underwent surgery. VTE incidence at 90 days and 1 year postoperatively were 4.1 and 6.3%, respectively. Patient factors including age, sex, performance status, and comorbidities were not associated with VTE risk. VTE risk peaked at 1 month after surgery, with a subsequent decline, plateauing after 6 months. Adenocarcinoma was strongly associated with VTE risk compared with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (odds ratio [OR] 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38–4.63, p = 0.003). VTE risk decreased with adjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.36–0.94, p = 0.028). Postoperative VTE was associated with decreased survival at 1 and 5 years (hazard ratio = 1.57, 95% CI 1.23–2.00, p < 0.001). Conclusion Esophageal cancer patients with postoperative VTE have worse long-term survival compared with those without thrombotic complications. Adenocarcinoma carries a higher VTE risk compared with SCC. Strategies to reduce VTE risk should be considered to reduce the negative impacts on survival conferred by thrombotic events.
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) | 0.002 | 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".