MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390779300 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3837728/v1

Simple imaging biomarker predicts survival in anal squamous cell cancer treated with curative intent: a UK cohort study.

2024· preprint· en· W4390779300 on OpenAlexaff
Anita Wale, Laurence Bernier, Diana Tait, Sheela Rao, Gina Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersPelican Cancer FoundationRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustBowel Disease Research FoundationImperial College LondonDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineAnal cancerStage (stratigraphy)Univariate analysisInternal medicineOncologyCohortBiomarkerMultivariate analysisColorectal cancerSquamous cell cancerSurvival analysisCancerGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose This study aimed to determine the prognostic significance of length of tumour (mrT stage) and depth of extramural spread (mrEMS) in anal squamous cell cancers (SCC) treated by chemoradiation with curative intent. Locally advanced anal SCC (T3-4 N+) have poorer prognosis, but it is unknown whether the lateral spread of the tumour (extramural spread beyond the bowel wall) also confers poor prognosis in anal SCC, as it does for rectal cancer. T stage and mrEMS can be readily assessed by pelvic MRI routinely undertaken to stage anal SCC. Methods 125 patients were included. Baseline mrT, mrN and mrEMS were assessed with response to chemoradiation and outcomes. ROC curve was used to determine a binary cut-off for mrEMS according to 3-year progression free survival (PFS). Results 43% were mrT3-4 and 38% were mrEMS poor at baseline. 87% achieved mrCR. 3-year PFS and OS was 70.6% and 82%. On univariate analysis worse 3-year PFS was seen for mrT3-4 (HR 3.105), mrEMS poor (HR 4.924) and failure to achieve mrCR (HR 20.591). By univariate analysis worse 3-year OS was seen for mrT3-4 (HR 4.134), mrEMS poor (HR 10.251) and failure to achieve mrCR (HR 19.289). On multivariate analysis only mrEMS poor and failure to achieve mrCR remained prognostic. mrN was not prognostic. Conclusion mrEMS poor is a simple prognostic imaging biomarker for poorer survival which can be readily assessed by radiologists on routine imagin. mrEMS should be considered as a future stratification variable to identify high risk SCC and consider escalation of treatment and surveillance strategies.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicColorectal and Anal CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207