P.054 Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients treated for acromegaly at The Ottawa Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Acromegaly is associated with significant morbidity. The purpose of this study was to establish characteristics and outcomes of patients treated for acromegaly at The Ottawa Hospital, to compare our results with published reports from other centers and to identify opportunities to improve patient care. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients surgically and medically treated for acromegaly between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 was completed. Demographic information, biochemical data, presenting features, disease comorbidities, treatment interventions, and were collected. Results: Fifty-one patients were identified using CCI/ICD-10 codes and IGF-1 levels. Similar to other centers, the majority of patients had a macroadenoma (78.4% vs 11.8%) with a high percentage invading the cavernous sinus (57.5%). While surgical intervention was performed in 90% of patients, only 23.3% of patient achieved surgical cure (IGF-1 normalization within reference range). Approximately 30% of patients were controlled with adjuvant medical therapy while more than 40 % had elevated IGF-1 levels at last follow-up. Radiotherapy was less commonly used. Conclusions: Despite a multi-modal treatment approach for acromegaly, outcomes are variable. This study highlights the need for further research to better understand factors associated with surgical cure, response to medical therapy and the role of radiotherapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".