Complications following surgery with or without radiotherapy or radiotherapy alone for prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Men undergoing treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer may experience a number of treatment-related complications, which affect their quality of life. METHODS: On the basis of population-based retrospective cohort of men undergoing surgery, with or without subsequent radiotherapy, or radiotherapy alone for prostate cancer in Ontario, Canada, we measured the incidence of treatment-related complications using administrative and billing data. RESULTS: Of 36 984 patients, 15 870 (42.9%) underwent surgery alone, 4519 (12.2%) underwent surgery followed by radiotherapy, and 16 595 (44.9%) underwent radiotherapy alone. For all end points except urologic procedures, the 5-year cumulative incidence rates were lowest in the surgery only group and highest in the radiotherapy only group. Intermediary rates were seen in the surgery followed by radiotherapy group, except for urologic procedures where rates were the highest in this group. Although age and comorbidity were important predictors, radiotherapy as the primary treatment modality was associated with higher rates for all complications (adjusted hazard ratios 1.6-4.7, P=0.002 to <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients treated for prostate cancer, radiation after surgery increases the rate of complications compared with surgery alone, though these rates remain lower than patients treated with radiation alone. This information may inform patient and physician decision making in the treatment of prostate cancer.
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) | 0.001 | 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".