Effectiveness and Safety of Cytoreduction Surgery in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Initial Experience at a University General Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate the initial efficiency and security of maximal effort cytoreductive surgery in stages III and IV of ovarian cancer at a university hospital. Methods: Thirty-four patients with stage III and IV ovarian carcinoma underwent surgery between January 2013 and June 2014 in the University General Hospital of Castellon (Spain). Patients with primary and relapse ovarian cancer were included. The extent of disease, type of surgical technique, amount of tumor prior to surgery and amount of residual disease after surgery were recorded. To quantify the efficiency and the security of the procedure, the complete cytoreduction and the morbidity and the mortality rates were described. Results: Of the patients 26.4% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Complete cytoreductive surgery, without evident residual tumor at the end of the procedure, was obtained in 79% of patients and optimal cytoreductive surgery (CC0-CC1) in 91%. Surgical complications were found in 56% of patients and two deaths (6%) occurred attributable to surgery. The disease free interval was 15 months. Conclusions: This study confirms that with experienced multidisciplinary teams and in tertiary referral hospitals, 79% of complete cytoreduction surgery in advanced ovarian cancer can be achieved but they must be prepared to deal with a high rate of complications. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2015;4(3):251-257 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jcgo345w
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".