Improved Survival in Contemporary Community-Based Patients With Metastatic Clear-Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Active Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the evolving treatment paradigms recommended based on phase III trials may have translated into improved overall survival (OS) in contemporary community-based patients with clear-cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma (ccmRCC) undergoing active treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the SEER database, contemporary (2017-2020) and historical (2010-2016) patients with ccmRCC treated with either systemic therapy (ST), cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN), or both (ST+CN) were identified. Univariable and multivariable Cox-regression models were used. RESULTS: Overall, 993 (32%) contemporary versus 2,106 (68%) historical patients with ccmRCC were identified. Median OS was 41 months in contemporary versus 25 months in historical patients (Δ=16 months; P<.001). In multivariable Cox-regression analyses, contemporary membership was independently associated with lower overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.8; P<.001). In patients treated with ST alone, median OS was 17 months in contemporary versus 10 months in historical patients (Δ=7 months; P<.001; multivariable HR, 0.7; P=.005). In patients treated with CN alone, median OS was not reached in contemporary versus 33 months in historical patients (Δ=not available; P<.001; multivariable HR, 0.7; P<.001). In patients treated with ST+CN, median OS was 38 months in contemporary versus 26 months in historical patients (Δ=12 months; P<.001; multivariable HR, 0.7; P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary community-based patients with ccmRCC receiving active treatment clearly exhibited better survival than their historical counterparts, when examined as one group, as well as when examined as separate subgroups according to treatment type. Treatment advancements of phase III trials seem to be applied appropriately outside of centers of excellence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".