MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072598178 · doi:10.1097/dcr.0b013e318235b885

Accuracy of Endorectal Ultrasound for Measurement of the Closest Predicted Radial Mesorectal Margin for Rectal Cancer

2011· article· en· W2072598178 on OpenAlexaff
P. Terry Phang, Marc J. Gollub, Bryan D. Loh, Garrett M. Nash, Larissa K. Temple, Philip B. Paty, José G. Guillem, Martin R. Weiser

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundTotal mesorectal excisionColorectal cancerRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingNuclear medicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: At present, pelvic phased array-coil MR is used as the validated imaging modality for measurement of the closest predicted radial mesorectal margin for rectal cancer. Endorectal ultrasound is also used to assess the clinical stage of the cancer that will determine the recommendation for neoadjuvant chemoradiation, but it has not been used to assess the closest predicted radial margin. OBJECTIVE: We propose to assess endorectal ultrasound identification of mesorectal margins and the measurement of the closest predicted radial tumor-mesorectal margin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients included were those having MRI and endorectal ultrasound for evaluation of primary rectal cancer in 2010 at a tertiary cancer referral colorectal clinic. Clinical data, MRI, and endorectal ultrasound images were assessed. Two independent retrospective measurements of mesorectal dimensions were correlated to evaluate the reproducibility of identifying mesorectal margins. MRI and endorectal ultrasound images were compared for independent measurements of mesorectal dimensions and of the closest predicted radial mesorectal margin. MRI and endorectal ultrasound determination of margin involvement were assessed for agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were studied with an average rectal cancer distance to the anal verge of 6.8 cm. Interobserver correlation coefficients of endorectal ultrasound mesorectal dimensions ranged from 0.47 to 0.53 (p < 0.01). MR and endorectal ultrasound measurements of the closest predicted radial mesorectal margin were correlated r = 0.56 (p < 0.0001). MR and endorectal ultrasound determination of margin involvement agreed in 81% of cases. CONCLUSION: Endorectal ultrasound has substantial agreement with MR to measure the closest predicted radial tumor-mesorectal margin. Correlations between observers and modalities for identification of mesorectal dimensions are modest. Further assessment is indicated to confirm endorectal ultrasound mesorectal measurements in a larger sample and to understand the advantages and disadvantages relative to MR.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207