Survival analysis of PETCAM: A multicenter randomized controlled trial of PET/CT versus no PET/CT for patients with resectable liver colorectal adenocarcinoma metastases.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
390 Background: An increasing proportion of patients with liver CAM are undergoing hepatic resection with curative intent. Detection of occult metastastic disease is important in this setting, and PET/CT is used to identify patients with either inoperable, or limited resectable extrahepatic disease not identified with conventional imaging. We recently reported the results related to the primary objective of PETCAM, a randomized trial for patients with resectable liver CAM, where 7.6% had a change in management based on PET/CT (ASCO 2011). As a secondary objective, we examined whether patients undergoing PET/CT derived a survival benefit, as they may be considered to be better selected. Methods: PETCAM was a multicenter trial with 404 subjects randomized 2:1 to receive PET/CT or no PET/CT once they were assessed by a hepatobiliary surgeon to have resectable CAM. Subjects were followed over 4 years for overall survival (OS). As well as the intervention, we considered the SUV, Fong Score and other baseline factors as predictors for OS. Results: After a median 2.8 years of follow-up, 107 of the 404 (26%) study subjects had died. The 270 PET/CT subjects [and the 245 of these who underwent surgery] showed no statistically significant survival advantage over the 134 No PET/CT subjects [123 who underwent surgery] with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57 to 1.3; p=0.41 [HR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.3; p=0.34]. Fong score was a strong predictor of OS for all patients (HR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.6), and for those who had surgery (HR=1.4, 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.7). In the PET/CT arm, SUV is strongly predictive of OS [HR per unit SUV increase =1.11, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.18; p=0.0007. Conclusions: The addition of PET/CT had no effect on improving overall survival for patients who did or did not have hepatic resection for CAM. SUV is strongly predictive of survival for patients who had PET/CT, and Fong score is predictive of survival for all patients. The overall role of PET/CT in patients with resectable CAM appears limited and should be reevaluated in the current era of comparative effectiveness research and health care cost containment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".