Mortality after treatment of malignant pleural effusions with indwelling pleural catheters versus chemical pleurodesis: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient outcomes following treatment of malignant pleural effusions (MPE) in the real-world setting. RESEARCH QUESTION: We aimed to compare post-procedure all-cause mortality between individuals who received indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) insertion versus chemical pleurodesis for managing MPEs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective population-based study using provincial health administrative data (Ontario, Canada) of adults with a MPE who underwent IPC insertion or chemical pleurodesis between 2015 and 2019. Individuals were followed until death or March 31, 2021. Difference in post-procedure mortality was calculated using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression analysis to balance potential confounders at baseline. RESULTS: We identified 4,790 (77.3%) individuals who received an IPC and 1,407 (22.7%) who had chemical pleurodesis for MPE. IPC insertions are increasing and chemical pleurodesis procedures are decreasing. The majority of IPCs were inserted in outpatients (61%), by pulmonologists (64.2%) and at sites with higher annual IPC volume, while chemical pleurodesis procedures were generally done by thoracic surgeons (74%) and at sites with higher annual pleurodesis volumes. In unadjusted comparison median time from initial cancer diagnosis to intervention was significantly longer in the IPC group (244 days, interquartile range [IQR]:33-903) compared to pleurodesis group (81 days, IQR:10-737; p < 0.0001). Unadjusted median time from index procedure to death was significantly longer in the pleurodesis group (165[IQR:48-457] days vs. 81[IQR:29-256] days, p < 0.0001), however the difference between groups became insignificant after the IPTW was applied (HR 1.27, 95%CI 0.95-1.69). 35% of IPCs were removed prior to death or end of follow-up. INTERPRETATION: After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics there was no difference in post-procedure mortality between IPC and chemical pleurodesis groups. In the real world, there are significant differences in the characteristics of patients who receive these two procedures and notable regional practice variation between procedure use. Future research should evaluate these variations in care and their effect on patient 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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".