Soft tissue sarcomas involving the pelvis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the true pelvis are rare tumors and there is little information in the literature related to pelvic STS. The purposes of this review were to understand the anatomic extension of these tumors to better plan surgical treatment and to determine the outcome of these patients. METHODS: Eighteen consecutive patients presenting between 1987 and 1995 with soft tissue sarcomas involving the true pelvis were retrospectively reviewed at minimum follow-up of 18 months. Cross-sectional imaging was reviewed for each patient to determine the anatomical location of the lesions. RESULTS: The tumors were confined to the true pelvis in 4 patients, extended to the retroperitoneum in three cases, and extended to the thigh in 11 patients. Adjuvant radiation was administered to all but 2 patients who had received radiation to the region in the past and all patients underwent surgical resection (local resection in 13 patients and hindquarter amputation in 5 patients). Surgical resection had a high rate of morbidity and complications including positive resection margins in nine individuals. Of the 18 patients, 11 died at a mean time of 15.5 (2-58) months from surgery, 4 were alive with evidence of disease at a mean time of 44.3 (18-68) months, and 3 were alive with no evidence of disease at a mean time of 57 (43-71) months. CONCLUSIONS: Soft tissue sarcoma of the pelvis is fortunately a rare disease with a high risk of local and systemic disease progression despite treatment with irradiation and surgical resection.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".