MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Patterns of referral for adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer: A population-based analysis.

2012· article· en· W2560003588 on OpenAlexaffabout
Harvey Quon, Derek Suderman, K. Guilbert, Pascal Lambert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatectomyProstate cancerRadiation therapyPerineural invasionCancerInternal medicineStage (stratigraphy)Randomized controlled trialUrologyGynecologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

140 Background: Randomized trials have shown improved biochemical disease free survival after adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) in patients with pT3 or margin positive disease after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. This study examines the rates of referral to a radiation oncologist for patients with high risk pathologic features after prostatectomy. Also, the impact of the presentation of these randomized trials will be examined. Methods: All men diagnosed in the province of Manitoba with prostate adenocarcinoma between 2003 and 2008 who underwent radical prostatectomy were identified through a central cancer registry database. Manual chart review was performed and detailed demographic and clinico-pathologic data were analyzed to determine their influence on referral to a radiation oncologist within 6 months of surgery. Analysis of referral rates before and after the presentation of 2 randomized trials were also examined. Results: A total of 1080 patient records of men undergoing prostatectomy for prostate cancer were reviewed. Of these, 546 (50.6%) men had at least one high risk pathologic feature. This includes pT2 margin positive disease in 298/546 (54.6%), pT3a in 154/546 (28.2%), and pT3b in 94/546 (17.2%). Multivariable logistic regression was performed adjusting for age, distance from cancer centre, Gleason score, T stage, perineural invasion, and margin status. Gleason score 8-10 (p<0.0001), higher pathologic T stage (p<0.0001), and farther distance (p=0.0028) were associated with referral for ART. Age and margin status were not significantly associated. Men with pT3a (odds ratio 3.35) and pT3b disease (odds ratio 5.32) were more likely to be referred than pT2 margin positive disease (p<0.0001). There were 78/546 (14.3%) patients with a high risk factor who were referred for ART within 6 months of surgery. The rates of referral were not significantly different before and after the presentation of randomized trials (p=0.60). Conclusions: Men with higher pathologic stage (pT3) and grade (Gleason 8-10) are more likely to receive ART. However, referral for ART did not increase significantly after presentation of the randomized trials and remains underutilized.

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)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.398 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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