MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcome of Bone Marrow Biopsy in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Patients Staged by Combined 18 FGD-PET/CT Scan

2016· article· en· W2979644514 on OpenAlexaff
Rasha Hamed, Rami Kotp, Eric Turecotte, Baseem Sawan, Annie Morine

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphomaBiopsyConcordanceBone marrowStage (stratigraphy)MalignancyNuclear medicineRadiologyPET-CTInfiltration (HVAC)Positron emission tomographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract DLBCL represents 1/3 of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, in 60% of the cases the disease presented in advanced stage (III-IV). Extranodal organs are involved in 40% of cases; BM involvement in 11% to 27% of cases. BMB is an invasive procedure, & it also could represent false negative result in patients with patchy pattern of involvement or if involvement else where the routine biopsy site. Study included 102 patients, above the age of 18 years, confirmed to have newly diagnosed DLBCL with no any other malignancy. Every patient had a baseline PET-Ct, bone marrow biopsy. PET-CT detected BM infiltration in 23 patients, i.e 22.5%. BMB were positive in 20 patients, while PET-CT showed BM involvement in 23 patients.- 94 patients had concordant negative ( 75 patients ) or positive ( 19 patients), PET-CT & BMB results. One patient had positive BMB and negative PET-CT. All patients with stage I & II had concordant PET-CT & BMB results One patient graded stage III by PET-CT showed 1-2% BM infiltration & upstaged to stage IV. Of the 49 patients graded stage IV by PET-CT, 3 had positive BM involvement PET-CT and negative BMB. the sensitivity of PET-CT was 95%, the specificity of PET-CT was 96.2%. the PPV was 86.4% & the NPV was 98.7%. PET-CT showed 95.9% accuracy. Our results suggest PET-CT as a powerful tool to evaluate BM infiltration in patients with DLBCL, with overall concordance exceeding 94% (100%for stage I & II ). For patients with advanced stage IV disease, PET-CT was able to retrieve patients with BM involvement & false negative BMB. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→