MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902351677 · doi:10.1148/radiol.2018181519

Effect of PET/CT on the Management and Outcomes of Participants with Hodgkin and Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Multicenter Registry

2018· article· en· W2902351677 on OpenAlexafffund
Ur Metser, Anca Prica, David Hodgson, Mindaugas Mozuraitis, María Eberg, Victor Mak, Bo Green, Amit Singnurkar, Jill Dudebout, Pamela MacCrostie, Noam Tau, Nicole Mittmann, Deanna L. Langer

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityCancer Care OntarioWomen's College HospitalHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioConfidence intervalStage (stratigraphy)Hodgkin lymphomaPropensity score matchingProportional hazards modelProspective cohort studyInternal medicineNuclear medicineLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To determine the relationship of PET/CT staging to the management and outcomes of participants with apparent limited-stage (LS) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) or aggressive non-HL (ANHL) treated with curative intent. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter registry included 850 participants (467 men and 383 women; median age, 54.1 years) from nine centers who had LS HL or ANHL on the basis of clinical data and CT, or with equivocal CT for advanced stage, who were considered for curative-intent first-line therapy. Participants were recruited between May 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015. Pre-PET/CT treatment plan was compared with treatment provided. Survival and second-line therapy initiation were compared with an historical control pool staged by using CT alone. Administrative data sources were used to control for baseline characteristics. Outcomes were assessed by using adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression and propensity score matching. Results PET/CT helped to upstage 150 of 850 participants (17.6%). There was a change in planned therapy in 224 of 580 (38.6%) of participants after PET/CT. There was a lower 1-year mortality for participants with ANHL in the PET/CT versus CT cohort (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.40, 1.0; P < .05) and for those with LS at PET/CT compared with those with LS at CT (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval: 0.21, 0.74; P = .004). For participants with HL, no 1-year outcome difference was found (P = .16). Conclusion PET/CT helped to upstage approximately 18% of participants and planned management was frequently altered. Participants with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma whose first-line therapy was guided by PET/CT had significantly better survival compared with participants whose treatment was guided by CT. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Scott in this issue.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207