The Association between Urinary Diversion Type and Other-Cause Mortality in Radical Cystectomy Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: It is unknown whether more complex UD, such as orthotopic neobladder and abdominal pouch, may be associated with higher OCM rates than ileal conduit. We addressed this knowledge gap within the SEER database 2004–2020. Methods: All T1-T4aN0M0 radical cystectomy (RC) patients were identified. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), cumulative incidence plots, univariable and multivariable competing-risks regression (CRR) models were used to test differences in OCM rates according to UD type (orthotopic neobladder vs. abdominal pouch vs. ileal conduit). Results: Of all 3008 RC patients, 2380 (79%) underwent ileal conduit vs. 628 (21%) who underwent continent UD (268 orthotopic neobladder and 360 abdominal pouch). After PSM relative to ileal conduit, neither continent UD (13 vs. 15%; p = 0.1) nor orthotopic neobladder (13 vs. 16%; p = 0.4) nor abdominal pouch (13 vs. 15%; p = 0.2) were associated with higher 10-year OCM rates. After PSM and after adjustment for cancer-specific mortality (CSM), as well as after multivariable adjustments relative to ileal conduit, neither continent UD (Hazard Ratio [HR]:0.73; p = 0.1), nor orthotopic neobladder (HR:0.84; p = 0.5) nor abdominal pouch (HR:0.77; p = 0.2) were associated with higher OCM. Conclusions: It appears that more complex UD types, such as orthotopic neobladder and abdominal pouch are not associated with higher OCM relative to ileal conduit.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".