Active surveillance criteria for prostate cancer: Can they be applied to Japanese patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prostate-specific antigen screening has significantly increased the percentage of men who are diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. All men undergoing retropubic radical prostatectomy for primary treatment of prostate cancer from April 2004 to September 2010 in our hospital were examined in order to determine whether active surveillance criteria could be applied to Japanese men. From pathological data of prostate biopsies, whether these men met five published criteria for active surveillance (Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance Study, University of California, San Francisco, Toronto and Kakehi criteria) was evaluated. Men who met any of the criteria had a statistically significant lower extracapsular extension rate and organ-confinement rate. From the view of the possibility of Gleason upgrading and organ-confinement rate, the Johns Hopkins Medical Institution and Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance Study criteria showed to be appropriate for Japanese patients. However, the present study had limitations of selection bias and a limited number of cases.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".