MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Incidence, distribution, and outcomes of node positive patients at radical prostatectomy: Manitoba Prostate Center experience.

2014· article· en· W2589675870 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kamaljot S. Kaler, Tadeusz Kroczak, Premal Patel, Rebekah Rittberg, Jeffery W. Saranchuk, Darrel Drachenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDissection (medical)ProstatectomyLymph nodeProstateLymphadenectomyLaparoscopic radical prostatectomyPelvisSurgeryUrologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

162 Background: Pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) varies among surgeons and institutions. Differences focus on candidacy for node dissection and the limit of dissection. Standard lymph node dissection is typically above the obturator nerve to external iliac vessels. We analyzed our local experience of lymph node metastases at time of surgery. Methods: Data from the Manitoba Prostate Center were collected on consective patients undergoing RRP from January 2003 to June 2013 by two urologists with subspecialty training in oncology. Information extracted includes age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), biochemical recurrence characteristics, and biopsy and pathological results. Results: Four hundred twenty consecutive patients comprised the data set and of whom 411 underwent a RRP and nine aborted prostatectomies. Average age of patients was 60 with an average preoperative PSA of 11. Overall lymph node metastases rate is 16.1%. Of the N1 patients, average number of positive nodes was 2.3. Average nodes removed for all patients were 13.4. Positive nodes on the right were found 53% of the time and 47% on the left. Locations of nodes are as follows: right external iliac, obturator, and hypogastric, 12%, 6%, and 19%, respectively; and for left external iliac, obturator, and hypogastric 9%, 3%, and 16%, respectively of all total nodes. One node was identified as other, and one surgeon sent packets as right pelvic and left pelvic with positive nodes 16% and 19% of all total positive nodes respectively. When looking at zones of a pelvic lymph node dissection separately, 54% are hypogastric, 13% obturator, and 33 external iliac. With an average of 37 months follow-up two patients with N1 disease died and only one from prostate cancer. Seventy nine percent had biochemical recurrence. Median time to treatment for biochemical recurrence was 4.5 months (0 to 33 months) with a median PSA of 0.28. Conclusions: This contemporary series of pelvic lymph node dissection with RRP represents high lymph node metastases (16%) relative to literature. Performing a limited pelvic lymph node dissection would under stage 54% of our patients. Despite high biochemical recurrence only one patient died of prostate cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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