Cancer‐Specific Survival of Trimodal Therapy Versus Radical Cystectomy in T2N0M0 Non‐Urothelial Bladder Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that, within organ-confined (OC, T2N0M0) non-urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder (non-UCUB) patients, trimodal therapy (TMT) use does not differ from radical cystectomy (RC) regarding cancer control outcomes. METHODS: Within the SEER database (2004-2021), rates of TMT versus RC use in OC non-UCUB patients were calculated. Nearest-neighbor 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and histological subtype was applied. Cumulative incidence plots depicted 5-year cancer-specific (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates. Multivariable competing risks regression (CRR) models were fitted. Sensitivity analyses were performed within squamous cell (SCC), neuroendocrine (NEC), and adenocarcinoma (ADK) and other histological subtypes. RESULTS: Of 814 OC non-UCUB patients, 310 (38%) received TMT versus 504 (62%) RC. After PSM, 5-year CSM rate was 50% after TMT versus 29% after RC and TMT was associated with 2.1-fold higher CSM relative to RC (multivariable HR [mHR]: 2.1, p < 0.001). In sensitivity analyses within 229 (28%) SCC, TMT patients had higher 5-year CSM rates relative to their RC-counterparts (67% vs. 22%, mHR: 4.3, p < 0.001). Similarly, within 314 (39%) NEC, TMT patients had higher 5-year CSM rates relative to their RC-counterparts (mHR: 1.8, p < 0.001). Conversely, within 118 (28%) ADK and 153 (19%) other subtypes, CSM after TMT did not differ from CSM after RC (33% vs. 15%, mHR: 1.4 and 43% vs. 33%, mHR: 1.4; p = 0.4). CONCLUSION: In OC non-UCUB patients TMT is associated with significantly higher CSM than RC. Most pronounced survival disadvantage was recorded within SCC and NEC patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".