Salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy will occur in approximately 20% of patients, for whom the therapeutic options include surveillance, salvage radiotherapy, or hormonal therapy. This review will focus on the evidence for salvage radiotherapy. Efficacy results of 30-50% have been reported from multiple retrospective series, with minimal morbidity. Unfortunately there are no randomized or prospective studies in this area. Results of salvage radiotherapy improve when given earlier, ideally with the serum prostate-specific antigen < 1 ng/mL. Other positive prognosticators are positive margins at radical prostatectomy, longer prostate-specific antigen doubling times, lower radical prostatectomy Gleason scores, and the absence of lymph node metastases. Current standard dosage is 64 Gy or slightly higher, although the optimal dosage has yet to be defined with prospective randomized trials. Salvage radiotherapy can provide a durable response when given early, and patients with recurrent disease should be considered for treatment or enrolment in clinical trials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".