MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002402283 · doi:10.1177/0846537119885682

A Single-Institute Experience With Radioactive Seed Localization of Breast Lesions—A Retrospective Study

2020· article· en· W3002402283 on OpenAlexaff
Klaudia Jumaa, Badria Al Johani, Muriel Brackstone, Anat Kornecki

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyRadiologyNuclear medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To assess the benefits associated with radioactive seed localization (RSL) in comparison to conventional wire localization (WL) for nonpalpable breast lesions. Methods: Radioactive seed localization was initiated at our institution in July 2013. Retrospective review of all WL performed between June 2012 and July 2013 (2013) and all RSL performed during June 2015 and July 2016 (2016). Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy or did not undergo their planned surgeries and WL performed in 2016 were excluded. The following data were collected: final pathology, resection margins for malignant lesions, time to surgery, seed migration, and number of localized lumpectomies performed by each surgeon. Results: A total of 292 WL procedures (288 women) in 2013 and 194 RSL procedures (186 women) in 2016 were eligible for the study. All WLs were inserted the day of surgery. Mean time from RSL insertion to surgery was 4.0 ± 2.8 days (range: 1-17 days). There was no difference in specimen size for malignant lesions (6.8 ± 2.8 cm for WL and 6.9 ± 2.9 cm for RSL; P = .5). Specimen radiographs were obtained in 233 (80%) of 292 WL compared to 194 (100%) of 194 RSL ( P < .001). For malignant lesions, positive margins were present in 34 (17.2%) of 198 with WL compared to 15 (10.3%) of 146 with RSL ( P < .001). Close margins (≤1 mm) were present in 31 (15.6%) of 198 with WL compared to 1 (0.6%) of 146 with RSL ( P < .001). The seed fell out of the specimen during surgery in 6 (3.1%) of 194. No seed loss was recorded. The surgeons (n = 4) who transitioned to RSL increased the number of surgeries per month from a mean of 4.4 ± 2.6 in 2013 to 6.9 ± 3.5 in 2016, equivalent to a 41% increase ( P = .003). Conclusions: The use of RSL, as compared to conventional WL, resulted in a reduction in the number of pathologically involved surgical margins and was associated with an increased number of surgeries. Furthermore, RSL can be performed up to 14 days prior to surgery, which may improve scheduling flexibility in the radiology department.

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)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207