MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319007459 · doi:10.1155/2004/715393

Predicting Residual Rectal Adenocarcinoma in the Surgical Specimen after Preoperative Brachytherapy with Endoscopic Ultrasound

2004· article· en· W2319007459 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Joseph Romagnuolo, Josée Parent, T. Vuong, Mélanie Bélanger, René P. Michel, Paul Belliveau, Judith L. Trudel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic ultrasoundBrachytherapyStage (stratigraphy)RadiologyLymph nodeColorectal cancerRadiation therapyNuclear medicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: A novel brachytherapy (BT) protocol evaluated at McGill University has shown promise in terms of downstaging and achieving high tumour sterilization rates in rectal cancer. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as the imaging modality of choice for local staging of rectal cancer. However, external beam radiotherapy appears to decrease the accuracy of EUS from 85% to 40%. The aim of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of EUS in assessing the response of rectal cancer to BT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-three patients with locally advanced (stage T2 or T3) operable rectal carcinomas were included in an experimental protocol involving a novel conformal technique, using three-dimensional planning, to administer high-dose rate preoperative BT. The 18 patients who were able to have a post-BT EUS exam arranged within two weeks before surgery (eg, four to eight weeks post-BT) were included in this study. Tumour (T)- and lymph node (N)-staging on radial EUS, as well as interpretation of the residual tumour, were assessed prospectively. Pathologists were blinded to the post-BT EUS results. RESULTS: The mean age was 70 years (SD +/- 11; range, 52 to 93 years) and 78% of the patients were male. Pre-BT EUS indicated that 16 patients (89%) were stage T3, and two were stage T2. Five patients (28%) had positive nodes (N1) by ultrasound. With BT, the mean maximal wall thickness on EUS decreased from 14 mm to 9.4 mm (P<0.001). At the time of surgery, seven of the 18 patients (39%) had no detectable tumour in the resected specimen; one had carcinoma in situ, one was stage T1, one was stage T2, and eight were stage T3. Eleven patients (61%) underwent an abdominoperineal resection, including four of the 11 (36%) with no ultimate evidence of residual carcinoma. Eight patients (44%) were node-positive. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of post-BT EUS in predicting residual tumour were 82%, 29%, 64% and 50%, respectively. The post-BT EUS accurately predicted the T-stage in eight (44%) patients; most errors were due to overstaging. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer T-staging by EUS post-BT is inaccurate, and although it appears sensitive in predicting the presence or absence of residual tumor in rectal adenocarcinoma after preoperative BT, the low predictive values in this setting limit its utility at this time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207