Bone scan use in the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Survey of practice patterns among Canadian radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, and urologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of skeletal scintigraphy with technetium-99 methylene diphosphonate (hereafter referred to as a bone scan) for evaluating response to systemic treatment in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is an evolving paradigm in this era of advancing therapies and imaging techniques. Indeed, the interpretation of bone scans can be challenging, and there is a growing expectation that advanced imaging techniques such as prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computer tomography (PSMA PET/CT) may play a complementary role.1 The Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG) has outlined specific criteria to define disease progression with respect to bone scans performed as part of clinical trials.2 However, there is no high-level evidence for the scheduling and interpretation of bone scans during routine therapeutic interventions for mCRPC. Thus, patterns of bone scan use are variable and practice-dependent outside of clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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".