The emerging roles of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the emerging roles of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). RECENT FINDINGS: RCC tumours are not as radio-resistant as previously thought, as local control rates of tumours treated with SABR are high. Therefore, SABR is an attractive treatment option for RCC tumours in which effective long-term palliation of symptoms or local control is desired. Like surgical resection of metastatic tumours, SABR can also be used as a method of eradicating oligometastases to potentially 'cure' or offer prolonged disease-free survival in patients with low-volume metastatic disease. In patients who develop progression of a solitary or few tumours (termed oligoprogression), SABR to the progressing 'rogue' tumours may delay the need to start or change systemic therapy. Finally, there is the potential for SABR to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy for metastatic RCC, given the known immune-modulated abscopal effect of radiotherapy. SUMMARY: SABR is increasingly being used in metastatic RCC patients, given the great potential to improve various outcomes. More prospective clinical trials are needed to identify and quantify the clinical benefits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".