MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403810575 · doi:10.36469/001c.124208

Adherence to First-Line Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Therapy in the Context of Guideline Recommendations for US Patients With High-Risk Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

2024· article· en· W4403810575 on OpenAlexaff
Franklin Gaylis, Bruno Émond, Ameur M. Manceur, Anabelle Tardif‐Samson, Laura Morrison, Dominic Pilon, Patrick Lefèbvre, Lorie Ellis, Balaji Hiremagalur, Andrea Ireland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of health economics and outcomes research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsMedicineBladder cancerContext (archaeology)Maintenance therapyCarcinoma in situInternal medicineGuidelineOncologyCancerUrologySurgeryChemotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) can reduce recurrence and delay progression among patients with high-risk non–muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), but is associated with a substantial emotional, physical, and social burden. Objectives This study evaluated the adequacy of first-line intravesical BCG treatment among high-risk NMIBC patients in the United States, including the subgroup with carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the bladder. Methods Adults with high-risk NMIBC treated with BCG were selected from de-identified MarketScan® Commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid Databases (1/1/2010-2/28/2021). Adequacy of BCG induction and maintenance was evaluated from the first BCG claim until the end of the patient’s observation, using a previously published claims-based algorithm (induction: ≥5 instillations within 70 days; induction and maintenance: ≥7 instillations within 274 days of first instillation) and a definition based on the landmark Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) trial (induction: ≥5 instillations without gaps >7 days; followed by ≥2 instillations at month 3, 6, and every 6 months thereafter). Proportions of patients with adequate BCG induction and maintenance were reported overall and compared between those with and without CIS. Results Of 5803 high-risk NMIBC patients treated with first-line BCG (mean age, 67.3 years; 20.6% female), 930 (16.0%) had CIS. After first-line BCG, 56.6% received another treatment. Although 86.9% had adequate BCG induction based on the claims-based algorithm (SWOG, 73.6%), only 41.5% had adequate BCG induction and maintenance (SWOG, 1.6%). Similar trends were observed for patients with and without CIS, with higher adherence to guidelines for patients with CIS (adequate induction using claims-based algorithm: 90.3% vs 86.2%; adequate induction and maintenance: 50.8% vs 39.7%, all P < .001). A greater proportion of CIS patients than non-CIS patients had cystectomy (CIS, 14.4%, non-CIS, 8.5%; P < .001) after first-line BCG. Discussion Among patients with NMIBC treated with first-line intravesical BCG, most received adequate BCG induction but less than half had adequate BCG maintenance. BCG treatment was also inadequate for patients with CIS, with only half of patients receiving adequate BCG maintenance and a higher proportion undergoing cystectomy following first-line BCG. Conclusions Results emphasize the need for additional treatment options for patients with NMIBC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.428
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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of health economics and outcomes researchSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207