Clinical, functional and radiological outcomes of extracorporeal irradiation in limb salvage surgery for bone tumours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We present a retrospective review of patients treated with extracorporeally irradiated allografts for primary and secondary bone tumours with the mid- and long-term survivorship and the functional and radiographic outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 113 of 116 (97.4%) patients who were treated with extracorporeally irradiated allografts between 1996 and 2014 were followed up. Forms of treatment included reconstructions, prostheses and composite reconstructions, both with and without vascularised grafts. Survivorship was determined by the Kaplan-Meier method. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system, the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) and Quality of Life-C30 (QLQ-30) measures. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using the International Society of Limb Salvage (ISOLS) radiographic scoring system. RESULTS: There were 61 (54%) men with a mean age of 22 years (6 to 70) and 52 (46%) women with a mean age of 26 years (3 to 85). There were 23 deaths. The five-year patient survivorship was 82.3% and the ten-year patient survivorship was 79.6%. The mean follow-up of the 90 surviving patients was 80.3 months (2 to 207). At the last follow-up, 105 allografts (92.9%) were still in place or had been at the time of death; eight (7%) had failed due to infection, local recurrence or fracture. Outcome scores were comparable with or superior to those in previous studies. The mean outcome scores were: MSTS 79% (sd 8); TESS 83% (sd 19); QLQ 82% (sd 16); ISOLS 80.5% (sd 19). Pearson correlation analysis showed a strong relationship between the MSTS and ISOLS scores (r = 0.71, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: 2017;99-B:1681-8.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".