Focal Prostate Cryoablation: Initial Results Show Cancer Control and Potency Preservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Focal prostate cryoablation is the less-than-complete ablation of the gland with ice. Known tumor is ablated aggressively, whereas contralateral prostate tissue and surrounding structures are spared. This method offers targeted local cancer control aiming at sexual potency and urinary continence preservation in patients whose prostate cancer is believed to be unilateral. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who had a strong desire for preservation of sexual function and continence were informed of focal prostate cryoablation as an investigational treatment option for clinically organ-confined, unilateral tumor identified by color Doppler ultrasonography and confirmed by targeted and systematic biopsy. Only stage, not preoperative serum prostate specific antigen concentration (PSA) or tumor differentiation, was considered a potential contraindication. Thirty-one men with a mean age of 63 years underwent the procedure. Follow-up consisted of PSA measurement every 3 months for 1 year and every 6 months thereafter, with biopsies at 6 months and 1, 2, and 5 years and following any three consecutive PSA rises. Potency was determined with a patient questionnaire filled in without the physician present. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 70 months, biochemical disease-free status, according to the ASTRO definition, was maintained by 92.8% of patients (26/28) and a 96.0% negative-biopsy rate (24/25) was observed. The one biopsy-positive patient was subsequently treated with full-gland cryoablation and remains disease free. Potency was maintained by 48.1% of patients (13/27) and another 40.7% (11/27) were potent with oral pharmaceutical assistance, yielding a total potency-preservation rate of 88.9%. No complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Focal cryoablation can provide biochemical and local control of prostate cancer while preserving potency and continence. Further investigation is needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".