18F-FDG-PET/CT in the Staging and Management of Melanoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Ontario PET Registry was established to provide evidence on the clinical impact of 18-FDG-PET/CT (PET) imaging to inform Ontario Health Insurance Plan funding decisions. The melanoma registry assessed the use of melanoma staging by PET in advanced or high-risk melanoma as a useful adjunct to clinical and standard radiologic investigation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2011 and July 2013, approximately 319 consecutive patients with potentially resectable localized high-risk melanoma or recurrent disease under consideration for metastasectomy underwent PET imaging for staging across 9 institutions in Ontario. Pre-PET stage information was provided by the referring clinician and compared with post-PET stage. The ability of PET to reclassify disease from M0 to M1 status was assessed. The registry data were then linked to provincial administrative databases using deidentified health insurance numbers to determine PET stage-based rates of systemic therapy, radiotherapy, and surgery. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in stage to M1 status after PET in 56 of 319 patients (17.6%) (P < 0.0001). There was no significant relationship between upstaging with PET and the proportion of patients receiving radiation therapy (P = 0.066) or systemic therapy (P = 0.072). There was a significant relationship between upstaging with PET and the proportion of patients undergoing surgical resection of metastases distant to the primary melanoma site (P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective, multicenter registry of high-risk or advanced melanoma found that PET significantly upstages patients and impacts surgical management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".