A randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer has been proven efficacious but morbidity and oncological outcome need to be investigated in a randomized clinical trial. Trial design: Non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. Methods: The COLOR II trial is an ongoing international randomized clinical trial. Currently 27 hospitals from Europe, South Korea and Canada are including patients. The primary endpoint is loco-regional recurrence rate three years post-operatively. Secondary endpoints cover quality of life, overall and disease free survival, post-operative morbidity and health economy analysis. Results: By July 2008, 27 hospitals from the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Spain, Denmark, South Korea and Canada had included 739 patients. The intra-operative conversion rate in the laparoscopic group was 17%. Distribution of age, location of the tumor and radiotherapy were equal in both treatment groups. Most tumors are located in the mid-rectum (41%). Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer is feasible. The results and safety of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer remain unknown, but are subject of interim analysis within the COLOR II trial. Completion of inclusion is expected by the end of 2009. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT00297791 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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".