MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Clinical outcomes and late toxicity of hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer.

2017· article· en· W2601246524 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Wang, R. Pearcey, Nadeem Pervez, Don Yee, Alina Mihai, Samir Patel, John Amanie, Matthew Parliament, Albert Murtha, Sunita Ghosh, M. Mackenzie, Colin Field, Nawaid Usmani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerToxicityProstateRadiation therapyGenitourinary systemUrologyProspective cohort studyCancerOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

56 Background: Since prostate cancer has intrinsic high radiation-fraction sensitivity, hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) could offer treatment advantages. However, dose-escalated HFRT may increase risks of late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can potentially deliver dose-escalated HFRT without increasing late toxicities. This study’s acute toxicity data was previously published. We now present five-year efficacy results and late toxicity data for prostate cancer patients treated with HFRT using IMRT. Methods: From 2005-2012, our Phase II prospective study enrolled one hundred patients with either high risk disease (one or more of: Stage ≥ T3, Gleason ≥ 8, or PSA ≥ 20 ng/mL) or high tier intermediate risk disease (Gleason 7 and PSA ≥ 15 ng/mL). All patients received HFRT using IMRT in 25 daily fractions. Sixty patients received 68 Gy to the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles, with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of 45 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes and distal seminal vesicles. Forty patients received 68 Gy to the prostate, and a SIB of 50 Gy to pelvic lymph nodes and seminal vesicles. Adjuvant hormonal therapy was given for two to three years. Biochemical failure was determined by the Phoenix definition. Late toxicity scores were recorded every 6 months after completing RT. Results: Median age of patients was 67 years. 33% had Stage ≥ T3, 52% had Gleason ≥ 8, and 44% had PSA ≥ 20 ng/mL. After a median follow-up of 5.4 years, median PSA at last follow-up was 0.10 ng/mL. Five-year biochemical control rate (BCR) was 91.8%, five-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 92.8%, and five-year overall survival (OS) was 88.7%. Five-year cumulative incidence of Grade ≥ 3 GU and GI toxicity were 13.0% and 16.7% respectively. At the five-year efficacy endpoint, ongoing Grade ≥ 3 GU and GI toxicity were 1.9% and 0% respectively. Conclusions: Dose-escalated HFRT using IMRT results in favourable five-year BCR, PFS, and OS for patients with localized high-risk prostate cancer, and is well-tolerated with acceptable late GU and GI toxicity. These findings support ongoing Phase III trials that are assessing the clinical use of IMRT-based HFRT. Clinical trial information: NCT00126802.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.384 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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