MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734456388 · doi:10.21037/jgo.2017.06.15

Radiation generates an abscopal response and complete resolution of metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal: a case report

2017· article· en· W2734456388 on OpenAlexaff
Moss Bruton Joe, Julian J. Lum, Peter H. Watson, R. Petter Tonseth, ohn Paul McGhie, Pauline T. Truong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gastrointestinal Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of VictoriaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbscopal effectAnal cancerRadiation therapyAnal canalOncologyPelvisCancerInternal medicineRadiologyImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The abscopal effect is a rare phenomenon in the setting of radiation therapy (RT) for metastatic cancer where tumor regression occurs distant from the site of treatment. A proposed mechanism of the abscopal effect is the activation of a systemic antitumor immune response by localized RT. We report the first case, to our knowledge, of the abscopal effect in squamous carcinoma of the anal canal with metastases to pelvic lymph nodes, liver and bone. After palliative RT to the pelvis with sensitizing chemotherapy, complete response was observed not only in the primary tumor but also in bone and multiple liver metastases at 4 months after treatment, an effect that remained durable at 4-year follow-up. Understanding of the abscopal effect and the immune mechanisms associated with anal cancer may lead to new avenues of research to improve outcome for patients with this rare disease.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0080.004
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gastrointestinal OncologySame topicColorectal and Anal CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207