MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362507332 · doi:10.1007/s00268-023-06974-x

Predictors and Prognostic Significance of Postoperative Complications for Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

2023· article· en· W4362507332 on OpenAlexaff
Yutaka Endo, Zorays Moazzam, Selamawit Woldesenbet, Henrique A. Lima, Laura Alaimo, Muhammad Musaab Munir, Chanza Shaikh, Alfredo Guglielmi, Luca Aldrighetti, Matthew J. Weiss, Todd W. Bauer, Sorin Alexandrescu, George A. Poultsides, Minoru Kitago, Shishir K. Maithel, Hugo P. Marques, Guillaume Martel, Carlo Pulitanò, Feng Shen, François Cauchy, Bas Groot Koerkamp, Itaru Endo, Timothy M. Pawlik

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineProportional hazards modelOdds ratioAbdominal surgeryLymph nodeIntrahepatic CholangiocarcinomaGastroenterologySurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of major postoperative complications (POCs) for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains ill-defined. We sought to analyze the relationship between POCs and outcomes relative to lymph node metastases (LNM) and tumor burden score (TBS). METHODS: Patients who underwent resection of ICC between 1990-2020 were included from an international database. POCs were defined according to Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ 3. The prognostic impact of POCs was estimated relative to TBS categories (i.e., high and low) and lymph node status (i.e., N0 or N1). RESULTS: Among 553 patients who underwent curative-intent resection for ICC, 128 (23.1%) individuals experienced POCs. Low TBS/N0 patients who experienced POCs presented with a higher risk of recurrence and death (3-year cumulative recurrence rate; POCs: 74.8% vs. no POCs: 43.5%, p = 0.006; 5-year overall survival [OS], POCs 37.8% vs. no POCs 65.8%, p = 0.003), while POCs were not associated with worse outcomes among high TBS and/or N1 patients. The Cox regression analysis confirmed that POCs were significant predictors of poor outcomes in low TBS/N0 patients (OS, hazard ratio [HR] 2.91, 95%CI 1.45-5.82, p = 0.003; recurrence free survival [RFS], HR 2.42, 95%CI 1.28-4.56, p = 0.007). Among low TBS/N0 patients, POCs were associated with early recurrence (within 2 years) (Odds ratio [OR] 2.79 95%CI 1.13-6.93, p = 0.03) and extrahepatic recurrence (OR 3.13, 95%CI 1.14-8.54, p = 0.03), in contrast to patients with high TBS and/or nodal disease. CONCLUSIONS: POCs were independent, negative prognostic determinants for both OS and RFS among low TBS/N0 patients. Perioperative strategies that minimize the risk of POCs are critical to improving prognosis, especially among patients harboring favorable clinicopathologic features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of SurgerySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207