MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115257371 · doi:10.3747/co.20.1206

When the Tumour Is Not the Culprit: Avascular Necrosis of the Hip in a Patient with Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

2013· article· en· W2115257371 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Esther Chan, Grace Chan, Lisa Ehrlich, Pamela C. Hull, Hans J. Kreder, William Chu, Edward Chow, Urban Emmenegger

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Joint Diseases
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreOccupational Cancer Research Centre
FundersProstate Cancer Canada
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerAvascular necrosisCulpritCastrationCancerNecrosisOncologyInternal medicineSurgeryFemoral headHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avascular necrosis (avn) of the hip is a well-documented side effect of corticosteroid therapy, but it has also been described as a complication of radiation and chemotherapy. Many prostate cancer patients undergo treatment with all three of those therapeutic modalities, and yet reported cases of avn of the hip in prostate cancer patients are rare. Symptoms that might potentially alert physicians to this complication are nonspecific and may be attributed to cancer progression, in particular to progressive bone metastasis.Here, we report on a 79-year-old man diagnosed with castration-resistant prostate cancer whose diagnosis of avn of the hip was confounded by his underlying malignancy. We discuss risk factors and diagnostic clues in this differential diagnosis of acute hip pain in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. Physicians might maintain a high index of suspicion for avn of the hip in prostate cancer patients presenting with new-onset hip pain. Surgical intervention may help to prevent the appearance of avn-associated pain and the negative impact of advanced avn on overall quality of life.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicBone and Joint DiseasesFrench-language works237,207