Baseline Staging Imaging for Distant Metastasis in Women with Stages I, II, and III Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In Ontario, there is no clearly defined standard of care for staging for distant metastasis in women with newly diagnosed and biopsy-confirmed breast cancer whose clinical presentation is suggestive of early-stage disease. This guideline addresses baseline imaging investigations for women with newly diagnosed primary breast cancer who are otherwise asymptomatic for distant metastasis. Methods: The medline and embase databases were systematically searched for evidence from January 2000 to April 2019, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to the use of baseline imaging investigation in women with newly diagnosed primary breast cancer who are otherwise asymptomatic. Final approval of this practice guideline was obtained from both the Staging in Early Stage Breast Cancer Advisory Committee and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care. Recommendations: These recommendations apply to all women with newly diagnosed primary breast cancer (originating in the breast) who have no symptoms of distant metastasis Staging tests using conventional anatomic imaging [chest radiography, liver ultrasonography, chest-abdomen-pelvis computed tomography (ct)] or metabolic imaging modalities [integrated positron-emission tomography (pet)/ct, integrated pet/magnetic resonance imaging (mri), bone scintigraphy] should not be routinely ordered for women newly diagnosed with clinical stage i or stage ii breast cancer who have no symptoms of distant metastasis, regardless of biomarker status. In women newly diagnosed with stage iii breast cancer, baseline staging tests using either anatomic imaging (chest radiography, liver ultrasonography, chest-abdomen-pelvis ct) or metabolic imaging modalities (pet/ct, pet/mri, bone scintigraphy) should be considered regardless of whether the patient is symptomatic for distant metastasis and regardless of biomarker profile.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".