A population-based validation of the IGCCCG Update Consortium for survival in metastatic non-seminoma testis cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2021, the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) Update Consortium reported improved overall survival (OS) rates in a modern cohort of metastatic non-seminoma testis cancer patients within each of the IGCCCG prognosis groups (96% in good vs. 89% in intermediate vs. 67% in poor), compared to the previous IGCCCG publication (92% in good vs. 80% in intermediate vs. 48% in poor). We hypothesized that a similar survival improvement may apply to a contemporary North-American population-based cohort of non-seminoma testis cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2010-2018) was used. Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox regression models tested the effect of IGCCCG prognosis groups on overall mortality (OM). RESULTS: Of 1672 surgically treated metastatic non-seminoma patients, 778 (47%) exhibited good vs. 251 (15%) intermediate vs. 643 (38%) poor prognosis. In the overall cohort, five-year OS rate was 94% for good prognosis vs. 87% for intermediate prognosis vs. 65% for poor prognosis. In multivariable Cox regression models predicting OM, intermediate (Hazard ratio [HR] 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-3.9, P < 0.001) and poor prognosis group (HR 6.6, 95% CI 1.0-1.0, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of higher OM, relative to good prognosis group. CONCLUSIONS: The survival improvement reported by the IGCCCG Update Consortium is also operational in non-seminoma testis cancer patients within the most contemporary SEER database. This observation indicates that the survival improvement is not only applicable to centres of excellence, but also applies to other institutions at large.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".