Management of Locally Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has a natural tendency to invade the venous system with formation of a venous tumor thrombus in the renal vein, which can extend proximally into the inferior vena cava (IVC) and in some cases into the right atrium. The presence of venous involvement significantly worsens prognosis. Despite recent advances in systemic therapies, surgery remains the most effective method of treatment and in the case of complete removal of all tumor, it provides satisfactory long-term survival and must be attempted whenever possible. Several surgical techniques have been proposed, but all are associated with a high rate of perioperative complications and mortality. Minimally invasive approaches are mainly applicable for less extended IVC thrombi, while open surgery remains the gold standard for this category of patients. Most IVC thrombi can be managed without use of circulatory support by using different methods of IVC control depending on the thrombus level. However, use of cardiac bypass with or without deep hypothermic cardiac arrest is indicated in some patients with bulky intraatrial tumor thombi. In select patients presenting with IVC tumor thrombus and synchronous distant metastases, cytoreductive nephrectomy with IVC tumor thrombectomy may be considered with or without neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Surgery for RCC with venous thrombus is complex and requires experienced multidisciplinary surgical, anesthesia, and critical care teams at high-volume centers to achieve the best outcomes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".