MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410240139 · doi:10.1002/cam4.70939

Association Between Pre‐Diagnostic Delay and Survival Among Patients With Esophageal and Gastric Cancer Treated With Curative Intent During the <scp>COVID19</scp> Pandemic

2025· article· en· W4410240139 on OpenAlexaff
Xin Wang, Yvonne Bach, Katherine Lajkosz, Osvaldo Espin‐Garcia, Hiroko Aoyama, Michael H. Wang, Ronan Andrew McLaughlin, Carly C. Barron, Abdul Rehman Farooq, Eric Xueyu Chen, J. Yeung, Carol J. Swallow, Savtaj S. Brar, Rebecca Wong, Aruz Mesci, John Kim, Patrick Veit‐Haibach, Sangeetha Kalimuthu, Raymond Jang, Elena Elimova

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of GuelphWestern UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersAmgen
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioProportional hazards modelInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyCohortStage (stratigraphy)Confidence intervalPandemicCancerGastroenterologySurvival analysisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The majority of esophageal and gastric cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage with poor overall survival (OS). Whether the pre-diagnostic interval from symptom onset has any impact on OS is unclear. We investigated this question in the peri-COVID19 pandemic era. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 308 patients with esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, or gastric carcinoma treated with curative intent at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from January 2017 to December 2021. Clinical details pertaining to the initial presentation were determined through a retrospective chart review. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association between pre-diagnostic intervals and OS, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. RESULTS: The median interval from symptom onset to diagnosis was 98 days (IQR 47-169 days). Using a cox proportional hazard model, prolonged pre-diagnostic interval was not associated with worse OS (HR 1.00, p = 0.62). Comparing patients diagnosed before and during the COVID19 pandemic, there was a notable increase in diagnostic delay with median pre-diagnostic interval increasing from 92 to 126 days (p = 0.007). Median age at time of diagnosis was 69.6 during the pandemic vs. 64.7 before the pandemic. Linear regression showed squamous cell histology was significantly associated with increasing time to initial diagnosis (p = 0.04), but this did not hold true in a multivariable model. Looking at other delay metrics, there were no changes in time interval from diagnosis to treatment during versus before the pandemic (median = 1.7 weeks for both), and there was no change in time from diagnosis to resection in those patients who underwent surgery. CONCLUSION: The COVID19 pandemic caused significant diagnostic delay for patients presenting with curative gastroesophageal and gastric cancer. The lack of correlation of pre-diagnostic interval with OS may reflect underlying tumor biology as the driving force that determines prognosis.

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)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207