MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331349386 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000001485

Surgical Management of Spinal Chondrosarcomas

2016· article· en· W2331349386 on OpenAlexaff
Charles G. Fisher, Anne Versteeg, Nicolas Dea, Stefano Boriani, Péter Varga, Mark B. Dekutoski, Alessandro Luzzati, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Richard P. Williams, Jeremy Reynolds, Michael G. Fehlings, Niccole Germscheid, Chetan Bettegowda, Laurence D. Rhines

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver Spine Surgery Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChondrosarcomaCohortPathologicalHazard ratioSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyDemographicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: An ambispective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the application of the Enneking classification in the management of spinal chondrosarcomas influences local recurrence and survival. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Primary spinal chondrosarcomas are rare. Best available evidence is based on small case series, thus making it difficult to determine optimal management and risk factors for local recurrence and survival. METHODS: The AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor developed a multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with spinal chondrosarcoma. Patient data pertaining to demographics, diagnosis, treatment, cross-sectional survival, and local recurrence were collected. Tumors were classified according to the Enneking classification. Patients were divided into two cohorts: Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI). They were categorized as EA when the final pathological assessment of the margin matched the Enneking recommendation, and otherwise, they were categorized as EI. RESULTS: Between 1987 and 2011, 111 patients (37 female; 74 male) received surgical treatment for a primary spinal chondrosarcoma at a mean age of 47.4 ± 15.8 years. Patients were followed for a median period of 3.1 years (range = 203 d-18.7 yrs). Median survival for the entire cohort was 8.4 years postoperative. After 10 years postoperative, 36 (32%) patients died and 37 (35%) patients suffered a local recurrence. Twenty-three of these 37 patients who suffered a local recurrence died. Sixty (58%) patients received an EA procedure while 44 (42%) received an EI procedure. EI patients had a higher hazard ratio for local recurrence than those who received an EA procedure (P = 0.052). Local recurrence was strongly associated with chondrosarcoma-related death (risk ratio = 3.6, P < 0.010). CONCLUSION: This is the largest multicenter cohort of spinal chondrosarcomas. EA surgical management appeared to correlate with a decreased risk of local recurrence, yet no relationship with survival was found. Where possible, surgeons should strive to achieve EA margins to minimize the risk of local recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicBone Tumor Diagnosis and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207