MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003518220 · doi:10.1002/jso.25854

Advancing patient age is associated with worse outcomes in low‐ and intermediate‐grade primary chondrosarcoma of the pelvis

2020· article· en· W3003518220 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew T. Houdek, Brent G. Witten, Mario Hevesi, Anthony M. Griffin, Ahmet Salduz, Doris E. Wenger, Franklin H. Sim, Peter C. Ferguson, Peter S. Rose, Jay S. Wunder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChondrosarcomaHazard ratioPelvisDiseaseSurgeryYoung adultOverall survivalInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Conventional primary pelvic chondrosarcoma often presents as a low- or intermediate-grade tumor in older patients. Although this is the most common variant of pelvic chondrosarcoma, studies examining treatment outcomes are lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients with these tumors to determine their outcomes of treatment. METHODS: Seventy-three patients (grade I [n = 19, 26%] and grade II [n = 54, 74%]) were reviewed including 55 (75%) males and 18 (25%) females, with a mean age of 51 (range, 17-81) years and follow-up of 9 ± 5 years. RESULTS: The 10-year disease-specific survival was 71%. Grade II disease (hazard ratio [HR], 6.74; P = .04) and age ≥50 years (HR, 3.97; P = .02) was associated with death due to disease. The 10-year local recurrence- and metastatic-free survival were 79% and 72%. Of the patients with a local recurrence (n = 11), 7 (64%) recurred at a higher histological grade. Patient age ≥50 years was associated with local recurrence (HR, 10.03; P = .02) and metastatic disease (HR, 4.20; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Advancing patient age was an independent risk factor for worse survival and disease recurrence. Tumors often recurred locally at a higher grade and as such wide local excision remains the treatment of choice for these tumors.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical OncologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207