MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound surgery for palliation of painful bone metastasis: Results of a multicenter phase III trial.

2013· article· en· W2604598681 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Hurwitz, Joshua E. Meyer, Dimitri Iozeffi, Pejman Ghanouni, David Gianfelice, Fiona M. Fennessy, Abraham Kuten, Suzanne LeBlang, Anne C. Roberts, Junsung Choi, Alessandro Napoli, V. Turkevich, Clare M. Tempany, Yael Inbar, Raphael M. Pfeffer, James M. Larner, S. Kanaev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Adverse effectBone metastasisBrief Pain InventoryRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleBlindingSurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingMetastasisCancerRadiologyChronic painPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9500 Background: Pain due to bone metastases is a common cause of cancer-related morbidity. Magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) is a non-invasive approach to thermal tissue ablation. This multi-center phase III trial assessed efficacy of MRgFUS compared with sham treatment to alleviate pain due to bone metastases. Methods: Subjects with a painful bone metastasis amenable to MRgFUS treatment for whom radiation therapy was ineffective or contraindicated were randomized 3:1 to MRgFUS or sham treatment in a single blind design. Un-blinding of sham subjects who did not experience significant pain relief within 2 weeks was permitted with crossover allowed to salvage MRgFUS treatment. Pain response and impact on quality of life (QOL) were assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS) and Brief Pain Inventory-Quality of Life (BPI-QOL). Safety was also assessed. Results: 142 randomized subjects were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. 67% (95%CI: 57.5-76.0%) of 107 subjects in the MRgFUS arm experienced clinically significant pain relief, equating with an anchor descriptor of “much improved” or better at 3 months compared to 20% of 35 sham arm subjects (p<0.0001). Median baseline and 3 month NRS scores were 7.0 and 2.0 for the MRgFUS arm vs. 7.0 and 6.0 for the sham arm. A clinically significant improvement at 3 months in BPI-QOL score for MRgFUS but not sham treatment was noted [average change: 2.4 vs. 0.2 respectively, (p<0.0001)]. MRgFUS treatment was well tolerated. Conclusions: MRgFUS, as demonstrated by this phase III trial, results in excellent rates of pain relief and improvement in QOL for patients with oncologic related bone pain who are not candidates for radiation therapy. Given these excellent results coupled with a favorable side effect profile, MRgFUS should be considered a primary choice for this patient population. Clinical trial information: NCT00656305.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207