Evaluation of a genomic-based prognostic test for metastasis in high-risk post-prostatectomy patients: Does it impact physician decision making?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
196 Background: Currently, identification of individual patients who are truly at risk of developing lethal prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP) is based on clinical nomograms. A prospectively validated genomic classifier (Decipher) has been shown to more accurately predict metastatic disease post RP than established clinical predictors and can identify patients with adverse pathology who may be cured by RP alone and may therefore not require additional treatment. Methods: An IRB-approved study assessed the impact of a genomic classifier (GC) test in 240 pathologically high-risk post RP case reviews. Twenty (20) urologic oncologists from 18 institutions reviewed 12 cases presented in a randomized, de-identified fashion via a secure online platform to provide treatment recommendations pre- and post- patient GC test results. Possible recommendations included referral to radiation oncologist and/or initiation of adjuvant hormones, close observation, or other. The primary endpoint was any change in treatment recommendation after unblinding of GC test results. Confidence in treatment recommendations was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: Following unblinding of GC test results, treatment recommendations changed in 43% (95% CI: 37-49) of all cases. Specifically, among cases with a pre-GC recommendation involving treatment, 31% (95% CI: 23-41) of respondents changed their recommendation to observation post-GC.Respondents considered the GC result to have influenced their recommendation in 63% (95% CI: 56-68) of cases. The addition of information provided by the GC result increased decision making confidence in 39% (95% CI: 30-49) of cases where a change of treatment recommendation was made. Following unblinding, physicians reported that the GC result was clinically relevant in 84% (95% CI: 79-84) of cases. Conclusions: GC appears to influence treatment recommendations and decision making confidence for high-risk prostatectomy patients. This study suggests that clinical implementation of GC may potentially impact treatment recommendations.
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 | 0.009 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".