MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A population based analysis of tumors up to 15 cm.

2016· article· en· W2591462114 on OpenAlexaff
Rosanna Yeung, Thomas Rackley, Britta Weber, Richard Lee, Marie-Laure Camborde, Moira Pearson, Cheryl Duzenli, Shaun Loewen, Mitchell Liu, Roy Ma, Devin Schellenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsCancerCare ManitobaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaCyberknifeRadiosurgeryRadiofrequency ablationPercutaneous ethanol injectionPopulationLiver cancerRetrospective cohort studyPercutaneousRadiation therapyNuclear medicineRadiologySurgeryAblationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

322 Background: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has an emerging role for patients with hepatocellular (HCC). The purpose of this study is to describe the efficacy of HCC SBRT at a population level without any tumor size restriction. Methods: A retrospective study of the first 49 HCC patients treated with SBRT between March 2011-July 2015 at the British Columbia Cancer Agency was conducted. All patients were either ineligible for or failed standard local therapies (partial hepatectomy, radiofrequency ablation, percutaneous ethanol injection, transarterial chemoembolization, or radioembolization) and discussed in a multidisciplinary rounds setting. Local control (LC), progression free survival (PFS) (defined as freedom from failure elsewhere in the liver) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed at 1 and 2 years. Changes to Child’s Pugh (CP) score at 3 months post-SBRT were also analyzed. Results: Median follow-up was 14 months with 35 patients (71%) alive at last follow-up. Fifty-two separate HCC lesions were treated with a median size of 4.2 cm (range: 1.3-15.6 cm) and a planning treatment volume (PTV) of 114 cm3 (range: 22-1776 cm3). Over half of the lesions (55%) were ≥ 4cm. Thirty-six patients (74%) had previous local therapies. Prior to SBRT, 57% of patients were CP A5, 33% were CP B6, 8% were CP B7, and 1 patient (2%) was CP B8. At 3 months post-SBRT, 35% of patients had an increased CP score, with a mean increase of 1.8 points. The most common dose and fractionation was 45Gy in 3 or 5 fractions. Median V90 (dose to 90% of the PTV) was 99.8% (range: 74.1-100%). LC for all patients was 96% at 1 and 2 years. LC was comparable between moderate to large tumors ( ≥ 4cm) and those < 4cm (1 and 2 year LC: 96% for ≥ 4cm vs 95% for < 4cm). OS for all patients at 1 year was 67% and 62% at 2 years. PFS was 53% and 38% at 1 and 2 years respectively. The median PFS was 13.7 months with 13 patients (27%) undergoing further local treatment due to regional progression including 4 patients who had liver transplants. Conclusions: SBRT provides high local control for patients with HCC of even moderate to large size. Regional progression is prominent in HCC patients and SBRT does not appear to preclude further local treatments.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis→French-language works237,207→