Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases (RESECT), a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Highlights Traditionally, synchronous colorectal cancer and CRLM are resected separately. Many institutions have begun performing these procedures simultaneously. Minimal data support simultaneous resection including major liver resection. Complications will be investigated following simultaneous resection. This protocol will be implemented in 5 high-volume tertiary care centres worldwide. Introduction The “traditional approach” to resect synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastases (CRLM) is to perform staged resections. Many institutions perform simultaneous resection. Disadvantages to the simultaneous approach include longer operating room times, which may increase major postoperative complication rates. Data supporting simultaneous resection are limited to retrospective studies that are subject to selection bias. Therefore, we have proposed a single-arm prospective cohort pilot study to evaluate the postoperative complications following simultaneous resection of synchronous CRLM. Methods and analysis This single-arm study will be performed in five high-volume hepatobiliary centres to prospectively evaluate the following objectives: (1) To determine the 90-day postoperative complication rate of patients diagnosed with synchronous CRLM undergoing a simultaneous colorectal and liver resection, including major liver resections; (2) To determine the postoperative mortality rate at 90days following index surgery; (3) To determine change in global health-related Quality of Life (QoL) following simultaneous resection at three months compared to baseline; and (4) To build a costing model for simultaneous resection, We will also evaluate the feasibility of performing combined resection in these patients by evaluating the number of eligible patients enrolled in the study and determining the reasons eligible patients were not enrolled. This protocol has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02954913). Ethics and dissemination This study has been provincially approved by the central research ethics board. Study results will inform the design a randomized controlled trial by providing information about the comprehensive complication index in this patient population used to calculate the sample size for the trial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".