Preoperative Scoring Systems and Prognostic Factors for Patients With Spinal Metastases From Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study had been conducted to compare the existing preoperative scoring systems and to find useful prognostic factors for patients with spinal metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate different preoperative scoring systems and prognostic factors for patients with spinal metastases from HCC. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Different scoring systems for metastatic spinal tumor have been designed for prognostic evaluation. However, these scoring systems were formulated from many different types of tumors, so that their efficacy for a certain type of cancer needs to be validated. Furthermore, some serologic test results may enhance the accuracy of the scoring system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate 4 prognostic scoring systems and factors in a series of 41 cases with spinal metastases from HCC in a single center. These scoring systems include Tokuhashi revised score, Tomita score, Bauer score, and a revised van der Linden score by the authors. Serologic test items including serum albumin, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine transaminase, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were also evaluated. RESULTS: The revised Tokuhashi scoring system provided statistically significant differences in survival time between different groups (P = 0.012), while the Tomita and Bauer systems did not show statistically significant differences (P = 0.918 and P = 0.754, respectively). Significantly improved survival was found in patients with good performance status and no visceral metastases (Group C, P = 0.008) in revised van der Linden scores. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed serum albumin and LDH were independent prognostic factors for survival time. CONCLUSION: Revised Tokuhashi scoring system is practicable and highly predictive, while serum albumin and LDH also have prognostic value in patients with spinal metastases from HCC, especially those without visceral metastases. More accurate prognosis may be obtained if the scoring systems include clinical and laboratory data in future.
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".