Parameters predicting for prostate specific antigen response rates at one year post low-dose-rate intraoperative prostate brachytherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To develop a model for prostate specific antigen (PSA) values at one year among patients treated with intraoperatively planned 125 I prostate brachytherapy (IOPB).Material and methods: Four hundred and deven patients treated with IOPB for prostate adenocarcinoma were divided into four groups: those with PSA values ≥ 3 ng/ml; < 3 and ≥ 2; < 2 and ≥ 1 or PSA < 1 between 10.5 and 14.5 months post implantation (1yPSA).Ordinal regression analysis was then performed between patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics.1yPSA values were also compared with toxicity outcomes.Results: Median 1yPSA was 0.77 (0.04-17.36).Thirty-two patients (8%) had a PSA ≥ 3; 35 (9%) had PSA < 3, ≥ 2; 87 (21%) had PSA < 2, ≥ 1, and most patients 254 (62%) had PSA < 1. PSA response was independent of gland volume, Gleason score, clinical stage, seed activity, V 90 , V 200 , D 90 , or number of needles and seeds used.Older patients had significantly lower 1yPSA; median ages 65.1 (46.5-81.0),62.1 (50.4-79.5),60.5 (47.1-80.3),and 58.1 (45.1-74.2) years for each of the 1yPSA groups respectively (p < 0.001).Also, both implant V 150 (p < 0.001) and initial PSA values (p = 0.04) were predictive of 1yPSA values.There was no correlation between 1yPSA values and toxicity encountered.Conclusions: PSA response at 1 year post IOPB appears to be dependent on patient age, initial PSA, and implant V 150 .Our results provide reassurance that parameters other than biochemical failure influence 1yPSA values.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".