MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402930329 · doi:10.1007/s00345-024-05218-4

Young age and adequate BCG are key factors for optimal BCG treatment efficacy in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer

2024· article· en· W4402930329 on OpenAlexaff
Kang Liu, Rossella Nicoletti, Hongda Zhao, Xuan Chen, Hongwei Wu, Chi‐Ho Leung, David D’Andrea, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Francesco Soria, Andrea Gallioli, Marcelo Langer Wroclawski, Daniele Castellani, Vineet Gauhar, Juan Gómez Rivas, Dmitry Enikeev, Paolo Gontero, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Peter Ka‐Fung Chiu, Chi‐Fai Ng, Jeremy Yuen‐Chun Teoh

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineBladder cancerProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalOncologySubgroup analysisBCG vaccineConfoundingSurvival analysisCancerUrologyImmunologyVaccination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of ageing on survival outcomes in Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) treated non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients and its synergy with adequate BCG treatment. METHOD: Patients with NMIBC who received BCG treatment from 2001 to 2020 were divided into group 1 (< = 70 years) and group 2 (> 70 years). Overall Survival (OS), Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS), Recurrence-Free Survival (RFS), and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to adjust potential confounding factors and to estimate Hazard Ratio (HR) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI). Subgroup analysis was performed according to adequate versus inadequate BCG treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 2602 NMIBC patients were included: 1051 (40.4%) and 1551 (59.6%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. At median follow-up of 11.0 years, group 1 (< = 70 years) was associated with better OS, CSS, and RFS, but not PFS as compared to group 2 (> 70 years). At subgroup analysis, patients in group 1 treated with adequate BCG showed better OS, CSS, RFS, and PFS as compared with inadequate BCG treatment in group 2, while patients in group 2 receiving adequate BCG treatment had 41% less progression than those treated with inadequate BCG from the same group. CONCLUSIONS: Being younger (< = 70 years) was associated with better OS, CSS, and RFS, but not PFS. Older patients (> 70 years) who received adequate BCG treatment had similar PFS as those younger with adequate BCG treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207