MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1834491116 · doi:10.2196/resprot.4303

Treatment of Basal Cell Carcinoma Using a One-Stop-Shop With Reflectance Confocal Microscopy: Study Design and Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial

2015· article· en· W1834491116 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D.J. Kadouch, Albert Wolkerstorfer, Y.S. Elshot, Biljana Zupan‐Kajcovski, Marianne B. Crijns, Markus V Starink, Marcel W. Bekkenk, Allard C. van der Wal, Phyllis I. Spuls, Menno A. de Rie

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)ConfocalRandomized controlled trialConfocal microscopyBasal cell carcinomaMedicineBasal cellPathologyOpticsAlternative medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer diagnosed in white populations worldwide. The rising incidence of BCC is becoming a major worldwide public health problem. Therefore, there is a need for more efficient management. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this research is to assess the efficacy and safety of a one-stop-shop (OSS) concept, using real-time in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) (Vivascope 1500; Lucid Technologies, Henrietta, NY, USA) as a diagnostic tool, prior to surgical management of new primary BCCs. METHODS: This is a prospective non-inferiority multi-center RCT designed to compare the "OSS concept using RCM" to current standards of care in diagnosing and treating clinically suspected BCC. Patients ≥ 18 years attending our outpatient clinic at the Department of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, and the Department of Dermatology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) with a clinically suspected new primary BCC lesion will be considered for enrollment using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and will be randomly allocated to the experimental or control group. The main outcome parameter is the assessment of incomplete surgical excision margins on the final pathology report of confirmed BCC lesions (either by punch biopsy or RCM imaging). Other outcome measures include diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of RCM for diagnosing BCC and dividing between subtypes, and throughput time. Patient satisfaction data will be collected postoperatively after 3 months during routine follow-up. RESULTS: This research is investigator-initiated and received ethics approval. Patient recruitment started in February 2015, and we expect all study-related activities to be completed by fall 2015. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT is the first to examine an OSS concept using RCM for diagnosing and treating clinically suspected BCC lesions. Results of this research are expected to have applications in evidence-based practice for the increasing number of patients suffering from BCC and possibly lead to a more efficient disease management strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02285790; https://clinicaltrial.gov/ct2/show/NCT02285790 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6b2LfDKWu).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207