MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Local control following resection of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma with and without preoperative radiotherapy.

2015· article· en· W2761165227 on OpenAlexaff
Carol J. Swallow, Amanda J. Cannell, Brendan C. Dickson, Sally M. Burtenshaw, Peter Chung, Rebecca A. Gladdy, Brian O’Sullivan, Charles Catton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapySarcomaSurgeryBiopsyCohortExternal beam radiotherapyClinical endpointRadiologyBrachytherapyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10572 Background: Retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) represents a therapeutic challenge due to its typically advanced stage at presentation, with local failure a harbinger of death from sarcoma following resection of primary RPS. Preoperative external beam radiotherapy (Pre-op RT) offers the potential for sterilization of margins and better local control. We present mature outcomes according to histologic subtype and treatment of patients with primary RPS managed at our center. Methods: All patients presenting with primary RPS between 01/96 and 06/11 identified from a prospective database were eligible. Distant metastases or unresectability at presentation, receipt of pre-op chemotherapy or post-op radiotherapy were exclusion criteria. All biopsy and resection specimens were re-analysed by an expert pathologist and mdm2 status used to facilitate histologic subtyping. Cumulative-incident rate curves were constructed for local and distant recurrence (LR, DR). Results: All 120 included patients underwent total gross resection. In this cohort, overall survival was 75% and 64% at 5 and 10 yrs, median 206 mos, and disease specific survival was 85% and 76% at 5 and 10 yrs, median 209 mos. Pre-op RT was given to 101 patients while 19 had surgery alone. Surgical approach, histologic subtype (80% liposarcoma, LPS) and follow-up (median 59 mos) did not differ between treatment groups; median size was larger (28 vs. 19 cm) and histologic grade lower in the surgery alone group. For the 120 patients, DR occured in 12 at a median 23 mos (range 2-131) postoperatively and varied significantly by histology (4/65 DD-LPS; 0/31 WD-LPS; 7/17 LMS; 1/7 other; p < 0.01), but not treatment group. LR occured in 24 at a median 22.5 mos (range 2-103) and varied significantly by histology (22/65 DD-LPS; 2/31 WD-LPS; 0/24 other; p = 0.01). For the entire cohort, LR rate was 20% and 28% at 5 and 10 yrs. LR at 5 yrs varied significantly by treatment group (16% for pre-op RT, 51% for surgery alone, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Pre-op RT was associated with improved local control compared with a contemporaneous control. Participation in the EORTC randomized trial of pre-opRT vs. surgery alone is essential to determine the true benefit of pre-op RT in primary RPS.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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