MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399210316 · doi:10.2196/46737

Predicting Lung Cancer Survival to the Future: Population-Based Cancer Survival Modeling Study

2024· article· en· W4399210316 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fan-Tsui Meng, Jing‐Rong Jhuang, Yan-Teng Peng, Chun‐Ju Chiang, Ya‐Wen Yang, Chi-Yen Huang, Kuo‐Ping Huang, Wen‐Chung Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerMedicineSurvivorship curveCancer registryCancerCohortSurvival analysisSurvival ratePopulationRetrospective cohort studyRelative survivalOncologyDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with late diagnoses often resulting in poor prognosis. In response, the Lung Ambition Alliance aims to double the 5-year survival rate by 2025. OBJECTIVE: Using the Taiwan Cancer Registry, this study uses the survivorship-period-cohort model to assess the feasibility of achieving this goal by predicting future survival rates of patients with lung cancer in Taiwan. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data from 205,104 patients with lung cancer registered between 1997 and 2018. Survival rates were calculated using the survivorship-period-cohort model, focusing on 1-year interval survival rates and extrapolating to predict 5-year outcomes for diagnoses up to 2020, as viewed from 2025. Model validation involved comparing predicted rates with actual data using symmetric mean absolute percentage error. RESULTS: The study identified notable improvements in survival rates beginning in 2004, with the predicted 5-year survival rate for 2020 reaching 38.7%, marking a considerable increase from the most recent available data of 23.8% for patients diagnosed in 2013. Subgroup analysis revealed varied survival improvements across different demographics and histological types. Predictions based on current trends indicate that achieving the Lung Ambition Alliance's goal could be within reach. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis demonstrates notable improvements in lung cancer survival rates in Taiwan, driven by the adoption of low-dose computed tomography screening, alongside advances in diagnostic technologies and treatment strategies. While the ambitious target set by the Lung Ambition Alliance appears achievable, ongoing advancements in medical technology and health policies will be crucial. The study underscores the potential impact of continued enhancements in lung cancer management and the importance of strategic health interventions to further improve survival outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→