MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037948993 · doi:10.1097/spc.0b013e3282efd70b

Role of radiation therapy and radiopharmaceuticals in bone metastases

2007· review· en· W2037948993 on OpenAlexaff
Alysa Fairchild, Edward Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapySpinal cord compressionAdverse effectExternal beam radiotherapySpinal cordRandomized controlled trialNeuropathic painRadiologySurgeryInternal medicineBrachytherapyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Bone metastases remain the most common cause of cancer-related pain. Palliative radiotherapy and radiopharmaceuticals are effective for symptom control, but continue to be underutilized. We review recent literature for the treatment of bone metastases and spinal cord compression, and address new developments in the prevention of adverse effects secondary to radiotherapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence continues to mount in support of the efficacy of short-course radiation schedules. Emerging data support the use of single fractions. While radiotherapy is relatively nontoxic, pain flare can be a distressing side effect. Recent reports suggest that traditional and more innovative radiopharmaceuticals are well tolerated, with effects comparable with external beam radiation and the added advantage of addressing multiple, widespread painful sites simultaneously. SUMMARY: There is an urgent need for more randomized controlled trials in the radiotherapy of complicated bone metastases, such as the settings of spinal cord compression and neuropathic pain. Additional study of radiopharmaceuticals as adjuvants to external beam radiotherapy would also serve to further elucidate the optimal treatment for these patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.233
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Supportive and Palliative CareSame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207