MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517798044 · doi:10.1097/mph.0000000000000657

Low-grade Nonrhabdomyosarcoma Soft Tissue Sarcoma: What is Peculiar for Childhood

2016· article· en· W2517798044 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Fawzy, Mohamed Sedky, Hossam Elzomor, Magdy El Sherbiny, Emad Salama, Ahmed Mahdy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibromatosisSarcomaSoft tissue sarcomaAggressive fibromatosisSoft tissueIncidence (geometry)HistologyCancerDiseaseSurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of soft tissue sarcomas are nonrhabdomyosarcomas (NRSTSs). The low-grade (LG) form comprises a heterogenous group of diseases that rarely metastasize but are known for local recurrence. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study was to retrospectively evaluate pediatric LG-NRSTS with regard to demography, survival, and factors affecting outcome in Egyptian patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study reviewed 66 NRSTS patients who presented to the Pediatric Oncology Department, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, between January 2008 and December 2013. RESULTS: Out of the reviewed cases 32 patients had LG tumors and were eligible for analysis. The male to female ratio was 1:1 and the median age was 7.5 years (range, 1 mo to 18 y). Desmoid fibromatosis (N=18) showed frequent local recurrence and nearly half of this group was alive without disease. No recurrence of the disease occurred in the nonfibromatosis group (n=14) and all patients were alive and free of disease. The 5-year overall survival was 88% for the entire group of study patients versus 45% for event-free survival. Tumors >5 cm in diameter and fibromatosis histology subtype were associated with lower EFS. CONCLUSIONS: LG-NRSTS generally has good prognosis, with overall survival reaching 90%. However, aggressive fibromatosis usually runs a poorer course in the form of high incidence of local recurrence and lower survival rates. This needs to be further assessed in larger prospective studies including novel therapies in addition to the current conventional modalities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Hematology/OncologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207