Treatment Patterns among Canadian Men Diagnosed with Localized Low-Risk Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In general, guideline-recommended treatment options for men with low-risk prostate cancer (pca) include active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, and external-beam radiation therapy or brachytherapy. Because of the concern about overdiagnosis and consequent overtreatment of pca, patients with low-risk disease are increasingly being managed with active surveillance. Using data from six provincial cancer registries, we examined treatment patterns within a year of a diagnosis of localized low-risk pca, and we assessed differences by age. Of patients diagnosed in 2010 in four of the six reporting provinces, most received surgery or radiation therapy within 1 year of diagnosis. Depending on the province, either surgery or radiation therapy was the most commonly used primary treatment. In the other two provinces, most patients had no record of treatment within a year of diagnosis. Examining treatment patterns by age demonstrated a lesser likelihood of receiving surgery or radiation therapy within 1 year of diagnosis among men more than 75 years of age than among men 75 years of age or younger (no record of treatment in 69.1% and 46.3% respectively). In conclusion, we observed interprovincial and age-specific variations in the patterns of care for men with low-risk pca. The findings presented in this report are intended to identify opportunities for improvement in clinical practice that could lead to improved care and experience.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".