MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Long-term outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate adenocarcinoma: A multi-institutional consortium study.

2018· article· en· W2792993335 on OpenAlexaff
Amar U. Kishan, Alan J. Katz, C.A. Mantz, Fang‐I Chu, Limor Appelbaum, Andrew Loblaw, Patrick Cheung, Irving Kaplan, Donald B. Fuller, Huong Pham, R. Meier, Mark K. Buyyounouski, Narek Shaverdian, Audrey Dang, Ye Yuan, H.P. Bagshaw, Nicolas D. Prionas, Patrick A. Kupelian, Michael L. Steinberg, Christopher King

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerAndrogen deprivation therapyBiochemical recurrenceRadiation therapyInternal medicineOncologyProstateDose fractionationUrologySurgeryCancerProstatectomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

84 Background: While a growing body of evidence supports the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for the treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate adenocarcinoma (PCa), some trepidation exists regarding its long-term efficacy and safety. Methods: Men with low- and intermediate-risk PCa, as defined per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, who were enrolled on various institutional phase II trials of SBRT between 2000-2012 were included in a multi-institutional consortium. Biochemical relapse (BCR) was defined as PSA > “nadir +2” or initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Toxicity data were scored according to the CTCAE v 3.0 or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scoring systems. Results: A total of 1644 men were eligible for analysis, with a median followup of 7.2 years. 297 patients (18.1%) had at least 9 years of followup. Fractionation schemes ranged from 33.50-40 Gy in 4-5 fractions. 892 patients had low-risk disease and 752 had intermediate-risk disease. 59 patients (3.6%) received short-term ADT. 100 patients (6.0%) experienced BCR, and 7 (0.4%) experienced distant metastases. No patients died of PCa. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, 5- and 10-year BCR-free survival rates were 98% and 94% in the low-risk group and 96% and 90% in the intermediate-risk group (p < 0.05 by log-rank test). 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 93% and 86% in the low-risk group and 95% and 91% in the intermediate-risk group (p > 0.05 by log-rank test). Five patients (0.3%) experienced grade 3 acute genitourinary (GU) toxicities, including urinary retention, hematuria, and frequency. 30 (2%) experienced grade 3 late GU toxicity, including urinary strictures, hematuria, and retention. One late grade 4 GU toxicity (hemorrhagic urethritis) and one late grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity (fistula-in-ano) were seen. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest analysis of long-term outcomes following SBRT for PCa. The results indicate that SBRT has an efficacy and toxicity profile that compares favorably to more widespread forms of treatment, such as conventionally-fractionated external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→