MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406716450 · doi:10.1016/s2352-4642(24)00302-x

International benchmarking of stage at diagnosis for six childhood solid tumours (the BENCHISTA project): a population-based, retrospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4406716450 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Botta, Fabio Didoné, Angela Lopez-Cortes, Adela Cañete, Emmanuel Désandes, Lisa Lyngsie Hjalgrim, Zsuzsanna Jakab, Charles Stiller, Bernward Zeller, Gemma Gatta, Kathy Pritchard‐Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroCHILDREN with CANCER UKNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchChildren's Cancer and Leukaemia GroupCancer Research UKNIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research CentreFondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS
KeywordsBenchmarkingRetrospective cohort studyStage (stratigraphy)MedicineCohort studyCohortPopulationEnvironmental healthSurgeryInternal medicineBiologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h2>Summary</h2><h3>Background</h3> International variation in childhood cancer survival might be explained by differences in stage at diagnosis, among other factors. As part of the BENCHISTA project, we aimed to assess geographical variation in tumour stage at diagnosis through the application, by population-based cancer registries working with clinicians, of the international consensus Toronto Childhood Cancer Stage Guidelines. <h3>Methods</h3> This population-based, retrospective cohort study involved 73 cancer registries from 23 European countries, Australia, Brazil, Japan, and Canada. Participating cancer registries applied the Toronto Guidelines to stage all incident cases of six childhood solid tumours—neuroblastoma, medulloblastoma, and Wilms tumour (age 0–14 years) and Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and osteosarcoma (age ≤19 years)—diagnosed between Jan 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2017. Eligible cancer registries were those able to assign stage according to the Toronto Guidelines; information on the staging investigations conducted was collected where available. European countries were grouped by geographical area and non-European countries were considered individually. We used χ<sup>2</sup> tests to compare stage distribution across these geographical areas and multivariable logistic models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for metastatic stage at diagnosis, using central Europe (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland) as the comparison. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to overcome potential bias from non-random missing stage information for some geographical areas and cancer types. <h3>Findings</h3> Data from 10 937 patients with cancer (6031 [55·1%] male and 4906 [44·9%] female) were analysed. Tumour staging was complete for 93·1% (10 180 of 10 937) of patients, ranging from 88·7% (1347 of 1518 patients) with medulloblastoma to 96·5% (1083 of 1122 patients) with Ewing sarcoma. Stage distribution differed statistically by geographical area for neuroblastoma, Wilms tumour, osteosarcoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma, but not for Ewing sarcoma or medulloblastoma. After excluding patients with missing stage information and, for the sarcomas, patients aged 18–19 years, the proportions of patients with metastases detected at diagnosis were 50·3% with neuroblastoma (1435 of 2852 patients; including 1159 [40·6%] stage M and 276 [9·7%] stage MS), 35·1% with medulloblastoma (473 of 1347 patients; stages M1–M4), 32·6% with Ewing sarcoma (335 of 1028 patients), 29·0% with rhabdomyosarcoma (368 of 1267 patients), 25·5% with osteosarcoma (345 of 1353 patients), and 18·2% with Wilms tumour (384 of 2114 patients). After adjusting by age group, significant differences in the proportions of patients with metastases detected at diagnosis were found between geographical areas for neuroblastoma, Wilms tumour, osteosarcoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma. <h3>Interpretation</h3> Assessed at a population level, the stage at diagnosis shows significant variation between geographical areas for several childhood tumours. This finding highlights the need for earlier diagnosis and standardisation of investigations for distant metastases. To enable ongoing comparisons, further cooperation efforts are required between cancer registries and clinicians regarding the sustainable and standardised use of the Toronto Guidelines at diagnosis. <h3>Funding</h3> Children with Cancer UK and Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro.

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)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent HealthSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207