MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictive value of prostatic adenocarcinoma after a negative prostate biopsy

2006· article· en· W2070350330 on OpenAlexaff
Paul C. Park, Nicolas L. D. Roustan Delatour, Christopher Morash, Ilias Cagiannos

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstateBiopsyProstate biopsyUrologyProstatectomyCancerAdenocarcinomaTransrectal ultrasonographyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the predictive value (PV) for all prostate cancers and for clinically significant cancer undiagnosed after a 10-core biopsy protocol, as the 10-core transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy is considered the standard technique of prostatic biopsy due to its high rate of detection of prostatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 132 consecutive radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens, with their corresponding 10-core biopsies, were reviewed. Cases with unilateral core involvement by prostate cancer were retained for study. Morphometric analysis was conducted on the biopsy-negative hemi-prostates to determine the PV of the biopsy protocol with respect to the size, position and clinical significance of the lesion. RESULTS: In all, 70 resected prostates (RP) had unilateral core involvement by prostate cancer. In 38 cases, there was cancer in the biopsy-negative hemi-prostates (group 1); in the remaining 32 the hemi-prostates were free of cancer (group 2). Group 1 was categorized by morphometric criteria. Specifically, 23 cases had one to eight foci of prostate cancer in the posterior nontransitional zone (NTZ) (group 1a), while 15 had two to six foci of prostate cancer in the transitional zone (TZ), or the anterior horn (AH) of the peripheral zone or the TZ and AH (group 1b). There were two cases with clinically significant prostate cancer in group 1a, and six in group 1b. CONCLUSIONS: The PV of a negative five-core biopsy protocol on a hemi-prostate is 54% for prostate cancer and 11% for clinically significant prostate cancer. Most clinically significant prostate cancers were in the AH/TZ of the prostate.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207