Mortality at 120 days after prostatic biopsy: A population‐based study of 22,175 men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trans-rectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate represents the diagnostic standard for prostate cancer, but its mortality rate has never been examined. We performed a population-based study of 120-day mortality after prostate biopsy in 22,175 patients, who underwent prostate biopsy between 1989 and 2000. The control group consisted of 1,778 men aged 65-85 years (median 69.5), who did not undergo a biopsy. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed in 11,087 of 22,175 (50%) men subjected to prostate biopsy, to identify predictors of 120-day mortality. Variables were age at biopsy, baseline Charlson comorbidity index and cumulative number of biopsy procedures. We externally validated the model's predictors in the remaining 50% of men. Overall 120-day mortality after biopsy was 1.3% versus 0.3% (p < 0.001) in the control group. Of men aged < or = 60 years, 0.2% died within 120 days versus 2.5% aged 76-80. Zero Charlson comorbidity score yielded 0.7% mortality versus 2.2%, if 3-4. First ever biopsy procedures carried a higher mortality risk than subsequent procedures (1.4 vs. 0.8 vs. 0.6%). In the multivariable model, first ever biopsy, increasing age and comorbidity predicted higher mortality. Overall, the model's variables were 79% accurate in predicting the probability of 120-day mortality after biopsy. In conclusion, our data suggest that prostate biopsy might predispose to higher mortality rate. The certainty of this association remains to be proven.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".