MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2578072678 · doi:10.1055/s-0035-1554213

Chondrosarcomas of the Spine: Prognostic Variables for Local Recurrence and Mortality in a Multicenter Study

2015· article· en· W2578072678 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Versteeg, Charles Fisher, Stefano Boriani, Péter Varga, Mark B. Dekutoski, Alessandro Luzatti, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Richard Williams, Jeremy Reynolds, Michael G. Fehlings, Chetan Bettegowda, Laurence D. Rhines

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChondrosarcomaSurgical marginCohortSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Primary spinal chondrosarcomas are rare. Best available evidence consists of small case series, making it difficult to determine optimal management and risk factors for local recurrence and mortality. The application of the Enneking classification in the treatment of primary bone tumors in the appendicular skeleton has led to a longer life expectancy, yet the application of the Enneking system in the treatment of primary bone tumors in the spine has not been widely accepted. Therefore, the aim of this multicenter cohort study was to determine prognostic variables, including application of the Enneking classification, for local recurrence and mortality following surgical intervention for spinal chondrosarcomas. Patients and Methods AOSpine knowledge forum tumor developed a multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with spinal chondrosarcoma. Patient data pertaining to demographics, diagnosis, treatment, cross-sectional survival, and local recurrence were collected. Tumors were classified according to the Enneking classification. Patients were analyzed in the following two different cohorts; Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI). EA was defined by the final pathology margin matching the Enneking recommended surgical margin and EI by not matching. Results Between 1987 and 2011, 112 patients (mean age at surgery = 47 ± 16 years) underwent surgical treatment for a primary spinal chondrosarcoma. EA surgery was performed in 61 (58%) patients. Overall, 15 patients (25%) suffered a local recurrence in the EA group and 21 (48%) in the EI group. EI approach significantly increased the risk for local recurrence ( p = 0.009). Overall, 38 (34%) patients died during the study period (mean follow-up = 3.6 ± 3.2 years); factors associated with increased overall survival were absence of adjuvant therapy ( p = 0.002), low-grade tumors ( p = 0.051), and involvement of one or two vertebral levels ( p = 0.038). Enneking appropriateness and surgical margin was not significantly associated with survival. Local recurrence was strongly related to mortality, with an odds ratio of 7.4. Conclusion This is the largest multicenter cohort of spinal chondrosarcomas. EI surgical management correlated with increased rates of local recurrence. This robust correlation strongly mandates to surgeons perform an EA resection with disease-free margins for spinal chondrosarcomas.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicBone Tumor Diagnosis and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207