MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980534287 · doi:10.1200/jgo.2019.5.suppl.78

A phase I study of MR-HIFU hyperthermia (HT) with radiation (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) for recurrent rectal cancer.

2019· article· en· W2980534287 on OpenAlexaff
William Chu, Yuexi Huang, Samuel Pichardo, Robert Staruch, Ari Partanen, Merrylee McGuffin, Kelvin Chan, C. Shun Wong, Gregory J. Czarnota, Kullervo Hynynen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsProfound Medical (Canada)University of CalgaryHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCapecitabineHyperthermiaAdverse effectRadiation therapyColorectal cancerNuclear medicineRadiologyQuality of life (healthcare)SedationToxicityCancerSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

78 Background: HT may improve cancer control and quality of life by sensitizing tumors to RT and CT. Inoperable recurrent rectal cancer has marginal outcomes with current retreatment regimens. We report the results from a first-in-human phase I study of MR-HIFU hyperthermia combined with RT and CT for recurrent rectal cancer. Methods: This ethics-approved study enrolled 6 patients fit for re-irradiation and chemotherapy; and with a MRI-visible and HIFU-accessible lesion. Patients received 30.6 Gy (17 fractions) and daily oral capecitabine, plus MR-HIFU HT immediately before RT on days 1, 8, and 15. Primary objectives were safety (acute toxicity) and treatment feasibility. Secondary objectives included late toxicity, pain palliation, quality of life, and radiologic response. HT was delivered with the Sonalleve MR-HIFU system on a 3T MRI. MR-based feedback control parameters were prescribed to achieve a mean temperature of 42.5°C in an 18 mm diameter target region for 30 minutes without exceeding 45°C. Results: One patient withdrew after completing 1/3 HT sessions due to scheduling and sedation difficulties. Five patients completed HT, RT and CT. There were no intraoperative complications, no adverse events or unintended tissue damage attributable to HT, RT, or CT. Table shows the best single continuous HT and mean temperatures (T90, T10), cumulative time in range (TIR), cumulative number of equivalent minutes at 43 o C(CEM43) and day 90 imaging response. Sonication and MRI suite times were 36±13 and 226±78min. Conclusions: MR-HIFU HT was safely delivered in patients with recurrent rectal cancer. Treatment planning and patient set-up times decreased while beam-on time increased with experience. MR-HIFU HT combined with RT and CT appears feasible for primary tumours. Clinical trial information: NCT02528175. [Table: see text]

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global OncologySame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207