MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cautionary tale of active surveillance in intermediate-risk patients: Overall and cause-specific survival in the Sunnybrook experience.

2015· article· en· W2474090921 on OpenAlexaff
Hima Bindu Musunuru, Laurence Klotz, Danny Vespirini, Liying Zhang, Alexandre Mamedov, Perakaa Sethukavalan, Vibhuti Jethava, Toshihiro Yamamoto, Suneil Jain, D. Andrew Loblaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineProstate cancerCohortMedian follow-upCancerProgression-free survivalSurgeryOverall survivalGastroenterologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

163 Background: To document the long-term outcomes of intermediate risk (IR) prostate cancer patients managed on active surveillance (AS) protocol in a single institute. Methods: Patients(pts) with PSA >10ng/ml or Gleason score 7 or clinical stage T2b/2c were identified from a prospectively collected database of 945 patients managed on AS between 1995 and 2013. Intervention was offered to those pts with a PSA doubling time of < 3 years, Gleason score or clinical progression.Overall survival (OS), cause-specific survival (CSS) for IR and low risk (LR) pts were analyzed as well as metastasis free survival (MFS) and treatment-free survival (TFS) for IR pts. Results: 237 (23.9%) pts had IR disease, with a median follow up of 6.9 years (IQR 3.89, 10.85) .708 pts had LR cancer with a median follow up of 6.4 years (IQR 3.76, 9.03). 61.2% of the IR cohort was older than 70 years. 86 IR pts (36.3%) received treatment (mainly radiation). The median treatment free interval for IR pts was 12.3 years (range 10.1 - 19.8). 33 IR patients developed biochemical failure and 17 developed metastatic disease [11 IR pts(4.6%) and 6 LR pts(0.8%)].The 10 and 15year OS was 68.4% and 50.3% for IR pts;83.6% and 68.8% for LR pts (p value <0.0001).Similarly 10 and 15 year CSS was 95.5% and 88.5% for IR ; 98.2% and 96.3% for LR pts (p value=0.006).The hazard ratio for IR pts versus LR pts was 2.08 for OS and 3.75 for CSS.IR pts had 3.75 times higher chance of dying from prostate cancer when compared to LR pts (Table). 10 year MFS and TFS were 92.1% (87.4-97.1%) and 58.5% (51.6-66.4%) in the IR cohort. Survival outcomes did not vary according to the year of patient enrollment. Conclusions: AS for intermediate risk prostate has significantly lower OS and CSS compared to low risk patients and therefore extreme caution should be exercised if it were to be implemented in intermediate risk patients. [Table: see text]

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→