Clinical and Biochemical Outcomes of High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients treated with Third Generation Prostate Cryosurgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives:To report on outcomes after modern-day primary prostate cryosurgery (CS) in D Amico high-risk (PSA >20 ng/ml, Gleason score ¢€°¥8, or tumor stage T2c or T3) localised prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated at a large academic center. Materials and Methods:730 consecutive cases of total gland prostate CS were reviewed, and 80 men with high-risk disease identified. Clinical data was analyzed, with primary and secondary endpoints being overall survival, cancer-specific survival, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and clinical progression. Results:Median age was 75.8 (55.4-88.1) years, median presenting PSA 20.0 (2.6-236.5) ng/ml, and median Gleason score 8 (6-10). Median follow-up was 49.6 (8.9-159.3) months. There were three PCa related deaths (4%); 34 (43%) and 39 (49%) men had BCR as defined by the Phoenix- and Stuttgart-criteria, respectively; 24 of the 39 (64%) men were re-biopsied. 13 of 80 (16%) had biopsy proven recurrent PCa. Nine (11%) subsequently underwent salvage CS. Six of the 39 (15%) men with BCR had metastatic disease on bone scan; 19 of 34 (49%) men with BCR received anti-androgen therapy, 18 (95%) of whom had also received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Conclusions:Prostate CS is a controversial treatment for high-risk patients, and our early experience revealed low cancer-specific mortality and morbidity, with encouraging biochemical and local control rates for these high-risk patients. In our series the incidence of metastases was less than that reported by Bolla et al. post-EBRT and hormones, and we therefore believe that prostate CS be strongly considered for these high-risk patients, and mandate that further study of CS for high-risk disease is warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".