MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387432799 · doi:10.5144/0256-4947.2023.315

Overall and progression-free survival in endometrial carcinoma: A single-center retrospective study of patients treated between 2000-2018

2023· article· en· W4387432799 on OpenAlexaff
Khalid Sait, Nisreen Anfinan, Hanan M. Shamrani, Maram Sait

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Saudi Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyEndometrial cancerInternal medicineProgression-free survivalPopulationCervical cancerSerous carcinomaDebulkingCarcinomaOncologyCancerOvarian cancerOverall survival

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Investigating survival in endometrial cancer (EC) is crucial to determine the effectiveness of overall management as it will reflect on the level of care provided among this population. OBJECTIVE: The study was conducted to analyze the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in treated endometrial carcinoma and to determine the associated predictors. DESIGN: Retrospective SETTING: Department of obstetrics and gynecology in university tertiary hospital PATIENTS AND METHODS: Baseline demographic and clinical data, tumor characteristics and perioperative and outcome data were collected from consecutive patients treated for EC between 2000 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression were used to analyze factors and predictors of OS and PFS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: OS, PFS and prognostic factors SAMPLE SIZE: 200 RESULT: Endometrioid type was the most common type accounting for 78.5% of the cases, followed by papillary serous carcinoma (18.5%). At diagnosis, 21.5% were stage III, and 12.0% were stage IV. Invasiveness features showed involvement of the myometrium (96.5%), lymph vessels (36.5%), cervix stroma (18.5%), lower segment (22.0%), and parametrium (7.0%). The majority of patients had open surgery (80.0%), while 11.5% and 7.0% had laparoscopy and robotic surgery, respectively. Staging and debulking were performed in 89.0% of patients, and 12.5% of patients had residual disease of more than 2 cm. The mean OS and PFS were 104.4 (95% CI=91.8–117.0) months and 96.8 (95% CI=83.9–109.7) months, respectively. The 5-year OS and PFS were 62.5% and 46.9%, respectively. The majority of the factors we assessed were significantly associated with OS or PFS. However, reduced OS was independently associated age ≥60 years (hazard ratio [HR]=1.99, P =.010), papillary serous carcinoma (HR=2.35, P =.021), and residual disease (HR=3.84, P =.007); whereas PFS was predicted by age ≥60 years (HR=1.87, P =.014) and residual disease (HR=3.22, P =.040). CONCLUSION: There is a need for a national strategy to tackle the growing burden of EC, by identifying the locally-specific incidence, delayed diagnosis and survival outcome. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-center study conducted at a tertiary center, which may question the generalizability of the findings, as the sample may be biased by overrepresentation with patients who were diagnosed at an advanced stage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Saudi MedicineSame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207