MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102006503 · doi:10.4172/2155-9619.s2-001

Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases and the Role of Positron Emission Tomography Imaging

2012· article· en· W2102006503 on OpenAlexaff
Richdeep S. Gill, Kevin Whitlock, David Al‐Adra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine & Radiation Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePositron emission tomographyColorectal cancerResectionRadiologyPathologyInternal medicineCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colorectal cancer remains the third most prevalent cancer worldwide, contributing to over 600,000 deaths per year.In North America, colorectal cancer is the fourth most common newly diagnosed cancer each year.Colorectal cancer often metastasizes to the liver, which is best treated with a combination of surgical hepatic resection and chemotherapy.Unfortunately, only 20% of patients are candidates for surgical resection at presentation.Accurately determining resectability of hepatic metastatic disease is important prior to proceeding to surgery.The optimal imaging modality remains to be determined.Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have been the primary imaging modalities used to date to identify intrahepatic metastatic disease.Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging has been shown to increase sensitivity and specificity for detecting extrahepatic metastases.However, PET imaging is limited by the inability to accurately localize these lesions.Combined PET/CT imaging has been proposed as method to improve accuracy in detecting intra and extra-hepatic metastases.Current evidence is limited and further prospective studies are needed to clarify the role of PET/CT imaging in metastatic colorectal disease.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Medicine & Radiation TherapySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207