MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391874122 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwad061.138

A138 ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION OUTCOMES IN T1B COLORECTAL CANCER: A SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

2024· article· en· W4391874122 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fiona Milne, Robert Bechara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndoscopic submucosal dissectionSingle CenterMedicineGeneral surgeryColorectal cancerDissection (medical)Center (category theory)Internal medicineCancerSurgeryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has transformed the approach to gastrointestinal neoplasms, particularly in managing T1 colorectal cancer(CRC) with superficial submucosal invasion (SMI), which is considered curative when other high-risk features are absent. Aims The aim of this study is to describe a single center’s experience with safety, and technical and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing ESD with T1b CRC, as well as explore differences in outcomes depending on depth of SMI. Methods This is a retrospective, single center study of patients who underwent ESD for suspected CRC at the Kingston Health Sciences Center, Ontario, Canada between October 2016 and April 2023. Patients with T1b CRC on their final pathology were included. We analyzed patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and technical outcomes. Patients were followed to determine cancer-free survival and tumor recurrence. Patients were stratified and compared by depth of SMI on their final pathology. Results A total of 32 patients with 33 T1b CRCs were included. 19 lesions had superficial SMI, and 14 had deep SMI on final specimens. Two procedures were aborted due to suspected deep invasion or fibrosis limiting ESD. The mean procedure time was 74.5 minutes and the mean efficiency was 12.3 min/cm3. ESD had high en-bloc (90.9%) and R0 (78.7%) resection rates, and there was no significant difference regardless of depth of SMI (p=0.08 and 0.372, respectively). 24 of 33 lesions had biopsy prior to ESD, and 22 of 24 lesions with previous histology (91.7%) had upgrade in pathology on their final ESD specimen. 2 patients had adverse events, and both were managed supportively. A total of 9 patients (27%) went on to have surgery. Those with deep SMI were more likely to have surgery (5% vs 57%, pampersand:003C0.005). The most common reason was lymphovascular invasion (44%). However, in the 7 patients who had complete ESD procedure and subsequent surgery, none had residual cancer on their surgical specimens, or malignant lymph nodes. The follow-up period for all patients ranged from 1 to 43 months with a mean follow-up time of 14.9 months. Of those who did not have surgery, all were cancer free at a mean follow up time of 16.2 months. Within the group of patients who had surgery, all were cancer free at a mean follow up time of 11.6 months. 5 patients died during the follow up period. None were from procedural related complications or disease recurrence. Conclusions ESD for T1b CRC is safe with high en-bloc and R0 resection rates. Patients with deep SMI were more likely to go on to have surgery, though this was frequently due to an additional high risk feature. Recurrence rates were low, but studies with longer follow up are needed. Funding Agencies None

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207