Malignant extradural spinal cord compression in men with prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Malignant epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) is a dreaded complication of malignancy and is fortunately not common. Approximately 7% of men dying of prostate cancer will have at least one episode of MESCC during their lifetime. Treatment needs to be individualized and estimating the prognosis is critical to achieving a balance between effectiveness therapy and the burden of treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: A consortium of multiple centers has defined prognosis scales, and multiple randomized studies have helped define the optimal dose fractionation schedule for patients getting radiotherapy. SUMMARY: Simple prognosis scales available to assist the clinician are reviewed. For poor prognosis patients, a single fraction of 8 Gy is just as effective as multiple fractions, however, are much more convenient. For good prognosis patients, surgery and radiation should be considered. For patients not getting surgery, enrollment in clinical trials of single vs. multiple fractions of radiation should be a priority. For high-risk patients, screening strategies are being developed and hold promise for maintaining ambulation throughout the patients' lifetime.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".