MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Clinical features, treatment, and outcome in 108 patients with localized, high-grade synovial sarcoma (SS)

2009· article· en· W2241006167 on OpenAlexaffabout
Abha A. Gupta, H. Al‐Hussaini, Celeste Yu, Anthony M. Griffin, V. Tsung, Derek Stephens, Martin E. Blackstein, David Hogg, Peter C. Ferguson, Jay S. Wunder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChemotherapyInternal medicineSynovial sarcomaRadiation therapyGastroenterologySarcomaSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10584 Background: There remains ongoing controversy in the treatment of localized SS, with no clear consensus on routine use of chemotherapy. Methods: Between 1986 and 2007, 93 adult (AP) and 15 pediatric (PP) patients were diagnosed with high grade, localized SS at 2 centres in Toronto. Clinical records and pathology reports were examined. Survival distribution functions were estimated by Kaplan-meier and compared using Log-rank test. Results: Median age for AP and PP was 36 (range 14–76) and 14 (range 0.4–18) years, respectively. Sixty-six (61%) patients had large tumours (> 5 cm), 7 (6.5%) had neuro-vascular invasion, and 10 (9.3%) had bone invasion. 76 (82%) AP and 8 (53%) PP received radiation (RT). 16 (17%) AP and 13 (87%) PP received chemotherapy. All patients underwent definitive surgery with gross total resection; 9 patients (8 PP) had positive margins. Some patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and response was evaluable in 15 patients: 10 SD, 2 PR, 1 CR, 1 PD. Relapse occurred in 32 patients: 28 distant, 3 local only, 1 local + distant. With a median follow-up of 5.6 years, EFS and OS was 72 ± 4.6% and 82 ± 4.2%, respectively and was similar for AP and PP. Patients with tumours > 5 cm had significantly worse EFS (63 ± 6.5%) compared to patients with small tumours (88 ± 5.4%, p=0.02), as did those with bone invasion (47 ± 18 vs.75 ± 4.9, p=0.05). The effect of chemotherapy was assessed in the entire cohort. Of 29 who received chemotherapy, 9 (31%) relapsed, and of 79 who did not receive chemotherapy, 23 (29%) relapsed. In patients with tumours >5 cm, relapse occurred in 41% (7/17) of those who received chemotherapy compared to 37% (18/49) in those that received no chemotherapy. Conclusions: Patients with SS < 5 cm have an excellent chance of cure with surgery and RT. Large tumours and those with evidence of bone invasion have a poor outlook. It is unlikely that chemotherapy contributes to an improvement in survival in SS. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→