The prognostic impact of bone metastasis in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:In metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), bone metastasis (BM) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, yet their role as an independent prognostic variable remains unclear. We aimed to determine the impact of BM on overall survival (OS) in patients with mUC treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC).Methods:mUC patients receiving PBC at the Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Tom Baker Cancer Center, or Cross Cancer Institute from January 2005 to January 2018 were identified retrospectively using central pharmacy database records. Patient disease, treatment, and response characteristics were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Variables reaching significance (<i>p</i> Results:Overall, 376 patients with a median follow-up of 16.8 (range: 2.2–218.3) months were included. Median age was 67 (range: 28–91) years, 76% were male, 63% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0–1, and 41% had BM. All patients received first-line PBC. Patients with BM had inferior median PFS (4.9 months (95% CI 3.6–6.2) <i>versus</i> 6.5 months (95% CI 5.4–7.6), <i>p</i> = 0.03) and median OS (8.8 months (95% CI 7.8–9.7) <i>versus</i> 10.8 months (95% CI 9.1–12.5), <i>p</i> = 0.002). In UVA, ECOG PS 2–3 (<i>p</i> p = 0.002), and WBC count ⩾ 11,000 cells/mm<sup>3</sup> (<i>p</i> = 0.001) were associated with inferior survival. Prior cystectomy (<i>p</i> p Conclusion:In this retrospective study, mUC patients with BM had worse OS suggesting that BM may be an independent negative prognostic factor and including BM as a stratification factor in future mUC clinical trial designs may be warranted. A greater focus must be placed on novel therapeutic strategies to better manage BM to reduce both morbidity and mortality.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 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".