MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387906361 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8341

Salvage therapy for BCG failure with intravesical sequential gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with recurrent NMIBC

2023· article· en· W4387906361 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Charles-Antoine Garneau, Nathalie Marcotte, L. Lacombe, Yves Fradet, Fradet Yves, Frédéric Pouliot, Paul Toren, Michele Lodde

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyBladder cancerGemcitabineDocetaxelInterquartile rangeSalvage therapySurgeryAdverse effectProgression-free survivalUrologyInternal medicineOncologyCancerOverall survivalChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) failure occurs in approximately 40% of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) within two years. We describe our institutional experience with sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel (gem/doce) as salvage therapy post-BCG failure in patients who were not candidates for or declined radical cystectomy (RC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed NMIBC patients with BCG failure who received gem/doce from April 2019 through October 2022 at the CHU de Québec-Université Laval. Patients received at least five weekly intravesical instillations according to published protocols. Patients who responded to gem/doce had maintenance instillations monthly for up to two years. Primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes included recurrence-free survival (RFS), cystectomy-free survival (CFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and treatment adverse events. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method from the first gem/doce instillation. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients with a median age of 78 years old were included in the study. The median followup time was 21 months (interquartile range 10-29). More than 25% of patients received two or more prior BCG induction treatments. Overall and MIBC PFS estimates at one year were 85% and 88%, and at two years, 60% and 70%, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 37% of the patients, but only two patients didn't complete the treatment due to intolerance. Three patients underwent RC due to cancer progression. OS was 94% at two years. CONCLUSIONS: With 60% of PFS at two years, gem/doce appears to be a safe and well-tolerated option for BCG failure patients. Further studies are needed to justify widespread use.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207