MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748743215 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000002386

Ewing Sarcoma of the Spine

2017· article· en· W2748743215 on OpenAlexaff
Raphaële Charest-Morin, Michael Dirks, Shreyaskumar Patel, Stefano Boriani, Alessandro Luzzati, Michael G. Fehlings, Charles G. Fisher, Mark B. Dekutoski, Richard P. Williams, Nasir A. Quraishi, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Chetan Bettegowda, Niccole Germscheid, Péter Varga, Laurence D. Rhines

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalUniversité Laval
FundersAOSpine
KeywordsMedicineSurgerySarcomaChemotherapyObservational studyRadiation therapyMedical recordInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, ambispective observational study. OBJECTIVE: To quantify mortality and local recurrence after surgical treatment of spinal Ewing sarcoma (ES) and to determine whether an Enneking appropriate procedure and surgical margins (en bloc resection with wide/marginal margins) are associated with improved prognosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Treatment of primary ES of the spine is complex. Ambiguity remains regarding the role and optimal type of surgery in the treatment of spinal ES. METHODS: The AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor developed a multicenter database including demographics, diagnosis, treatment, mortality, and recurrence rate data for spinal ES. Patients were stratified based on surgical margins and Enneking appropriateness. Survival and recurrence were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients diagnosed with primary spinal ES underwent surgery. Enneking appropriateness of surgery was known for 55 patients; 24 (44%) treated Enneking appropriately (EA) and 31 (56%) treated Enneking inappropriately (EI). A statistically significant difference in favor of EA-treated patients was found with regards to survival (P = 0.034). Neoadjuvant and postoperative chemotherapy was significantly associated with increased survival (P = 0.008). Local recurrence occurred in 22% (N = 5) of patients with an EA procedure versus 38% (N = 11) of patients with an EI procedure. The timing of chemotherapy treatment was significantly different between the Enneking cohorts (P < 0.001) and all EA-treated patients received chemotherapy treatment. Although, local recurrence was not significantly different between Enneking cohorts (P = 0.140), intralesional surgical margins and patients who received a previous spine tumor operation were associated with increased local recurrence (P = 0.025 and P = 0.018, respectively). CONCLUSION: Surgery should be undertaken when an en bloc resection with wide/marginal margins is feasible. An EA surgery correlates with improved survival, but the impact of other prognostic factors needs to be evaluated. En bloc resection with wide/marginal margins is associated with local control. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207