MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and medical inoperability of early stage non-small cell lung cancer

2006· article· en· W2245311357 on OpenAlexaff
K. Franks, Andrea Bezjak, Sallie‐Anne Pearson, B. C. Cho, David G. Payne, A. Sun, Thomas K. Waddell, Frances A. Shepherd, Shaf Keshavjee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineComorbidityStage (stratigraphy)CohortRetrospective cohort studyLung cancerDLCOPerformance statusRadiation therapyRadiosurgeryMedical recordCancerInternal medicineSurgeryLungDiffusing capacityLung function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

17074 Background: Early stage NSCLC is commonly diagnosed in elderly patients who often have significant medical co-morbidity. SBRT is emerging as a treatment alternative that can provide 80–97% local control for peripheral tumors. We performed a literature review and a retrospective review of 24 patients referred to Princess Margaret Hospital for consideration of SBRT to assess what criteria were used to determine patient selection for this new treatment. Methods: Published papers reporting treating stage I NSCLC with SBRT were reviewed. Clinical and demographic characteristics of patients referred for consideration of SBRT over the last 15 months were analyzed. All patients were assessed by experienced thoracic surgeons to determine their operability status. Patients were retrospectively scored as average or high risk for surgery on the basis of accepted PFT guidelines (FEV1 and DLCO <40% predicted); Charlson Index of Comorbidity (CCI) was calculated (score >2 associated with impaired survival). Results: Of 13 papers reporting Stage 1 SBRT results, 8 included details of medical inoperability. 2 papers had strict guidelines for PFTs, in addition to other criteria. In 6 studies reporting 276 pts, the most common reason for inoperability was non-specific medical comorbidity (60%). Our cohort (24 patients) referred for SBRT (median age 75, range 57–89) had a mean tumour size of 2.32cm (S.D. 1.11); 50% of patients had a good (0–1) Zubrod Performance status. Based upon PFT tests alone 10 patients (42%) were high risk and 5 (21%) average risk for surgery. The CCI score was ≥3 in 10 patients (42%). 3 patients who scored average risk and CCI ≤2 were deemed medically inoperable due a single severe medical comorbity. In 23/24 pts the surgeon recommended against surgery; one patient refused surgery. Conclusions: With an aging population and increased detection due to incidental finding or screening, it is important to know that there is effective alternative therapy for patients deemed too high risk for surgical resection. Comorbidity is an important factor influencing surgical mortality; defining explicit criteria for inoperability remains a clinical challenge. 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.396 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207