MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416378632 · doi:10.1111/bju.70085

Risk of metachronous upper tract urothelial carcinoma following non‐muscle‐invasive bladder cancer

2025· article· en· W4416378632 on OpenAlexaff
Keiran J.C. Pace, Jethro C.C. Kwong, Harkanwal Randhawa, Maximiliano Ringa, Zizo Al‐Daqqaq, Yashan Chelliahpillai, Soomin Lee, Kellie Kim, Samuel Haile, Amna Ali, Marian S. Wettstein, Amy Chan, Nathan Perlis, Jason Lee, Robert W. Hamilton, Neil E. Fleshner, Antonio Finelli, Munir Jamal, Frank Papanikolaou, Andrew Feifer, Girish S. Kulkarni, Alexandre R. Zlotta

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemMount Sinai HospitalUniversity Health NetworkTrillium Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrothelial cancerGuidelineIncidence (geometry)Urothelial carcinomaBladder cancerDuration (music)Bladder tumorGold standard (test)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk and timing of metachronous upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) after non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multi-institutional retrospective cohort study involving academic and community hospitals, clinicopathological data were collected from patients with NMIBC treated between 2005 and 2022. Patients with prior or synchronous UTUC at NMIBC diagnosis were excluded. The primary outcome was time to metachronous UTUC, confirmed on pathology or upper tract imaging. Secondary objectives included determining the cumulative incidence of UTUC stratified by the European Association of Urology risk groups and UTUC risk factors identified using Fine and Gray regression, with all-cause mortality as a competing risk. RESULTS: Among 3003 patients, 1158 (39%) were low-risk, 650 (22%) intermediate-risk, 944 (31%) high-risk, and 251 (8%) very high-risk. During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 4.9 (2.7-8.4) years, 104 patients developed UTUC. On multivariable analysis, multiple tumours were an independent predictor of UTUC (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.86, 95% confidence interval 1.24-2.80; P = 0.003). The 10-year cumulative incidence was 2.2% for low-risk, 4.4% for intermediate-risk, and 6.3% for high- and very high-risk patients. Routine imaging detected UTUC in 40% of low-risk, 58% of intermediate-risk, and 53% of high- and very high-risk patients. High-grade UTUC was found in 36% of low-risk, 63% of intermediate-risk, and 64% of high- and very high-risk patients. The majority of UTUC cases (77%) occurred within 5 years of NMIBC. CONCLUSIONS: The contemporary risk of metachronous UTUC may be lower than historical data. Our findings demonstrate that UTUC incidence is low in patients with low- and intermediate-risk NMIBC and increases in the high- and very high-risk groups. These results support current guideline recommendations to omit routine upper tract imaging in low-risk NMIBC and question its utility in intermediate-risk disease. In high-risk patients, routine imaging remains warranted, although the optimal frequency and duration are yet to be determined.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207