MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972890374 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-1050

Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography in Men with Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

2019· article· en· W2972890374 on OpenAlexaff
Wolfgang P. Fendler, Manuel Weber, Amir Iravani, Michael S. Hofman, Jérémie Calais, Johannes Czernin, Harun Ilhan, Fred Saad, Eric J. Small, Matthew R. Smith, Paola M. Perez, Thomas A. Hope, Isabel Rauscher, Anil Londhe, Angela Lopez‐Gitlitz, Shinta Cheng, Tobias Maurer, Ken Herrmann, Matthias Eiber, Boris Hadaschik

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersMercator Research Center RuhrAstellas PharmaGilead SciencesSirtex MedicalPfizerDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsProstate cancerGlutamate carboxypeptidase IIPositron emission tomographyMedicineCastrationProstateAntigenCancerOncologyInternal medicineNuclear medicineImmunologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Systemic androgen-signaling inhibition added to ongoing androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved clinical outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer without detectable metastases by conventional imaging (nmCRPC). Prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) detects prostate cancer with superior sensitivity to conventional imaging, but its performance in nmCRPC remains largely unknown. We characterized cancer burden in high-risk patients with nmCRPC using PSMA-PET. Experimental Design: We retrospectively included 200 patients with nmCRPC, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >2 ng/mL, and high risk for metastatic disease [PSA doubling time (PSADT) of ≤10 months and/or Gleason score of ≥8] from six high-volume PET centers. We centrally reviewed PSMA-PET detection rate for pelvic disease and distant metastases (M1). We further evaluated SPARTAN patients stratified by risk factors for PSMA-PET-detected M1 disease. Results: PSMA-PET was positive in 196 of 200 patients. Overall, 44% had pelvic diseases, including 24% with local prostate bed recurrence, and 55% had M1 disease despite negative conventional imaging. Interobserver agreement was very high (κ: 0.81–0.91). PSA ≥ 5.5 ng/mL, locoregional nodal involvement determined by pathology (pN1), prior primary radiation, and prior salvage radiotherapy independently predicted M1 disease (all P < 0.05). Conclusions: PSMA-PET detected any disease in nearly all patients and M1 disease in 55% of patients previously diagnosed with nmCRPC, including subgroups with PSADT of ≤10 months and Gleason score of ≥8. The value of PSMA-PET imaging for treatment guidance should be tested in future studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations267
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207