MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378713610 · doi:10.37349/emed.2023.00142

Effect of number of dissected lymph nodes on prognosis of patients with stage II and III colorectal cancer

2023· article· en· W4378713610 on OpenAlexaff
Reihane Mokarian Rajabi, Fariborz Mokarian Rajabi, Elham Moazam, Sana Mohseni, Mohammad Tarbiat, Anahita Emami, Amir Nik, Sayyideh Forough Hosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueExploration of Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerLymphStage (stratigraphy)Distributed File SystemInternal medicineConfidence intervalCohortOncologyOverall survivalProspective cohort studyCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: There is a correlation between the number of resected lymph nodes (LNs) and survival as well as staging in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This cohort discussed the effect of the number of dissected LNs on the prognosis [survival, disease-free survival (DFS)] of patients with stage II and III CRC. Methods: In this historical prospective cohort study, the records of 946 patients with CRC operated in the Seyyed-Al-Shohada hospital in Isfahan from 1998 to 2014 were enrolled. Then the impact of LNs on the overall survival (OS) and DFS were analyzed. Results: The number of removed LNs was higher among males [mean difference = 1.38, t (944) = 2.232, P-value = 0.02]. The median of the DFS for the patients with 1 to 20 LN removal was 104 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 90.97–117.03], while this number for the patients with more than 20 nodes was 166 months (95% CI: 140.41–191.58). DFS between two groups of CRCs, LN removal 1–20, and greater than 20. Age and number of LN removal were significant predictors of the DFS. There was a strong and statistically significant correlation between DFS and OS among CRC patients. Conclusions: This study shows that if the number of resected LNs in patients with CRC is more than 20, it will increase in DFS and OS.

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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExploration of MedicineSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207