MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

FDG PET/CT in pancreatic cancer staging and management: A retrospective study.

2017· article· en· W2599530196 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ana Beatriz Kinupe Abrahão, Yee Ung, Yoo‐Joung Ko, Scott R. Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePancreatic cancerPancreasRadiologyStage (stratigraphy)Pancreatic massAdenocarcinomaPositron emission tomographyCancerCancer stagingProspective cohort studyRetrospective cohort studyPET-CTNuclear medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

464 Background: FDG PET/CT scan (PET) has been approved by Cancer Care Ontario since 2011 for pancreatic cancer patients who have potentially resectable disease. A recent prospective study supported the use of PET in patients with a pancreatic mass and showed improved staging accuracy. Herein, we reviewed the outcomes of PET in the disease staging and management of patients with pancreatic mass at a single academic center. Methods: We collected demographics, CA 19-9 level, CT, MRI and PET results of patients with suspicious pancreas mass followed at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre from April to August 2011. We reviewed disease staging after CT/MRI and clinical management decision after PET result. We excluded patients with proven non-primary adenocarcinoma of the pancreas from the analysis. Results: In this cohort, 58 patients had PET scans. 14 patients with non-primary adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were excluded. From 44 patients analyzed, 61% of them were females, median age 70, 19 patients had biliary obstruction with biliary drain, CA 19.9 was elevated preoperatively in 27 patients (level above 1400 was seen in 37% of 44 patients), pancreatic mass median SUV = 4.8 and 7 patients had SUV < 2.5 with no FDG avid at the pancreas mass (both biopsy proven). Ten patients were discovered to have metastatic disease on PET. PET results were discordant with the CT/MRI disease staging in 34% of cases. PET revealed metastatic disease in 7 patients with prior CT or MRI considered to be negative for metastasis. PET showed localized disease in 8 patients with suspicious metastasis on CT or MRI. However, none of the patients underwent pancreatic resection. Clinical management was changed after PET results in 80% of patients with discordant PET and CT/MRI results. Conclusions: In this single-centre retrospective analysis, PET results changed the metastatic disease status depicted by CT or MRI in 34% of patients and clinical management was guided by PET results for the majority of those patients. This supports the use of PET as a tool to guide staging and treatment of pancreas 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→