MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patterns of radiation therapy technology use in the treatment of bone metastases.

2016· article· en· W2589353607 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matthew Chan, Robert Olson, Shilo Lefresne, Michael McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyProstate cancerTomotherapyLogistic regressionRadiosurgeryLung cancerNuclear medicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

211 Background: In recent years, there has been a transition from two-dimensional radiation therapy (2DRT) planning towards more advanced techniques such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Our study aim was to analyze these trends in the treatment of bone metastases. Methods: All patients aged 18 and older who had received palliative intent RT for bone metastases between 2009-2014 and referred to any 1 of 6 regional cancer centers in British Columbia, Canada were reviewed. Summary statistics were used to describe radiation technique patterns. Logistic regression modeling was used to assess the influence of demographic, clinical, and health services variables on receipt of types of RT. Results: We identified 8,059 patients and 15,832 courses of RT; overall, 97.9% of courses were achieved by 2DRT and 2.1% by 3D-CRT, VMAT, or SBRT. Despite the low overall use of advanced techniques, its use was significantly higher in all subsequent years compared to 2009 (p < 0.05 for all years). The median age for patients treated with 2DRT was 67.0 (19-99) versus 66.0 years (19-93) for advanced techniques. There did not appear to be a statistically significant difference in age at the time of treatment start (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.981-1.00, p < 0.05). Compared to lung cancers, thyroid (OR 9.9; 95% CI 5.197-18.724, p < 0.001) and kidney cancers (OR 3.9; 95% CI 2.508-5.911, p < 0.001) were significantly more likely to be treated with advanced techniques, while breast (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.621-1.306, p = 0.58) and prostate cancers (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.613-1.410, p = 0.73) were not any more likely. Compared to the Vancouver center, all other treatment centers in the province were utilizing advanced techniques less frequently. Patients were also more likely to complete RT with 2DRT than with advanced techniques (98.3% versus 95.8%, p < 0.05). Conclusions: The vast majority of treatment of bone metastases is still done by 2DRT in British Columbia. Despite these overall statistics though, a trend towards increasing use of more advanced techniques was observed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207