MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401611042

High intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU).

2011· article· en· W2401611042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jack Barkin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerHigh-intensity focused ultrasoundUltrasound energyProstatectomyProstateBrachytherapyCryotherapyUltrasoundRadiation therapyRadiologyCryosurgeryUrologySurgeryCancerInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Curative treatments for localized prostate cancer, from least invasive to most invasive, include brachytherapy, cryosurgery, three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, external beam radiation therapy, and radical prostatectomy. A patient with localized, low risk or intermediate risk prostate cancer who is diagnosed at an early age and receives one of these treatments has only an approximately 50% chance of maintaining an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, good spontaneous erections, and total continence by 5 years after treatment. OBJECTIVE: This article discusses transrectal high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment of localized prostate cancer using the Sonablate 500 (Focus Surgery, Indianapolis, IN, USA) device, which the author has adopted in favor of the Ablatherm (EDAP, TMS S. A., Lyons, France) device, the other HIFU device approved for use in Canada. METHOD: Characteristics of the ideal prostate cancer include stage T1-T2b, less than 40 cc in size, and with an anterior-posterior dimension of up to 35 mm high. The anterior zone of the prostate is treated before the posterior zone. The procedure involves 2 to 3 second bursts of ultrasound energy, followed by 3 second cooling cycles. In each treatment lesion, the physician achieves a temperature of 100 C at the focal point. The device allows for real-time visualization of tissue response following the delivery of ultrasound energy. CONCLUSION: HIFU is a minimally invasive, outpatient treatment for localized prostate cancer that provides similar short term and medium term cure rates and considerably less morbidity and side effects than other treatments. Although the effectiveness of HIFU has not yet been demonstrated in large, long term studies, this treatment option should be discussed with patients who have just been diagnosed with low risk or intermediate risk prostate cancer and desire aggressive, noninvasive, curative therapy, with potentially a lower incidence of side effects compared to conventional therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.008

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207