MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401892126 · doi:10.1002/jso.27795

Effect of race/ethnicity on survival in surgically treated intermediate/high risk non‐metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma

2024· article· en· W4401892126 on OpenAlexaff
Mattia Luca Piccinelli, Cristina Cano Garcia, Andrea Panunzio, Stefano Tappero, Francesco Barletta, Reha‐Baris Incesu, Zhe Tian, Stefano Luzzago, Francesco Alessandro Mistretta, Matteo Ferro, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Markus Graefen, Alberto Briganti, Carlo Terrone, Alessandro Antonelli, Felix K.‐H. Chun, Ottavio De Cobelli, Gennaro Musi, Pierre I. Karakiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePacific islandersRenal cell carcinomaNephrectomyHazard ratioPopulationInternal medicineConfidence intervalSurgeryOncologyUrologyKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: It is unknown to what extent 10-year overall survival of radical nephrectomy treated intermediate/high-risk non-metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma patients differs from age- and sex-matched population-based controls, especially when race/ethnicity is considered (Caucasian vs. African American vs. Hispanic vs. Asian/Pacific Islander). METHODS: We relied on the SEER database (2004-2018) to identify newly diagnosed radical nephrectomy treated intermediate/high risk non-metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma patients. For each case, we simulated an age- and sex-matched control relying on Social Security Administration Life Tables with 10 years of follow-up. We compared overall survival between renal carcinoma cases and population-based controls. Multivariable competing risks regression models tested for predictors of cancer-specific mortality versus other-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of 6877 radical nephrectomy treated intermediate/high risk non-metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma patients, 5050 (73%) were Caucasian versus 433 (6%) African American versus 1002 (15%) Hispanic versus 392 (6%) Asian/Pacific Islanders. At 10 years, overall survival difference between radical nephrectomy treated intermediate/high risk non-metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma patients versus population-based controls was greatest in African Americans (51% vs. 81%, Δ = 30%), followed by Hispanics (54% vs. 80%, Δ = 26%), Asian/Pacific Islanders (56% vs. 80%, Δ = 24%) and Caucasians (52% vs. 74%, Δ = 22%). In competing risks regression, only African Americans exhibited significantly higher other cause mortality (hazard ratio = 1.3; 95% confidence interval = 1.1 - 1.6; p = 0.01) than others. CONCLUSION: Relative to Life Tables' derived sex- and age-matched controls, radical nephrectomy treated intermediate/high-risk non-metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma patients exhibit worse overall survival, with worst overall survival recorded in African Americans of all race/ethnicity groups.

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)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207