Survey of radiation oncologists: practice patterns of the management of stage I seminoma of testis in Canada and a selected group in the United States.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate practice patterns of the management of stage I seminoma of testis in Canada and a selected group in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey among radiation oncologists treating genitourinary (GU) tumors in Canada and the RTOG GU committee members in the United States between January and March 2001. RESULTS: Response rate was 78% (73/93) in Canada and 67% (24/36) in the United States. Eighty-four percent described their clinical practice as a university affiliated teaching center, and 16% as community-based or private practice. Sixty-two percent, 31% and 7% would manage 1-5, 6-10 and > oe = 11 cases per year respectively. Almost all would perform chest x-ray (99%) and CT scan of abdomen and pelvis (100%) as staging investigation following radical inguinal orchiectomy. Forty percent also arranged CT scan of chest, while only 18% routinely obtained lymphangiogram. Seventy-eight percent offered surveillance as a management option and estimated that 20% (median) of patients would choose surveillance in their practice. Among four management options: (1. surveillance, 2. radiotherapy (RT) to the para-aortic region, 3. RT to the para-aortic and ipsilateral pelvis ('dog-leg'), 4. single-agent chemotherapy), the order of first preference was option 1 (44%), 2 (42%), and 3 (14%) for patients who wish to preserve fertility. When fertility was not a major concern, it was option 2 (43%), 3 (39%), and 1 (17%). The commonest dose-fractionation schedule was 25 Gy/20 fractions (68%). Others included 25 Gy/15 f (15%), and 25.5 Gy/17 f (4%). Forty-five percent chose the para-aortic region, while 53% used the 'dog-leg' as RT volume. Twenty-nine percent reduced RT volume from the 'dog-leg' to the para-aortic region as the result of MRC Phase III study published in 1999. CONCLUSION: There are significant variations in the practice pattern of the management of stage I seminoma of testis among radiation oncologists in Canada and a selected group in the United States.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".