MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3085395192 · doi:10.1111/bju.15236

Can post‐treatment free PSA ratio be used to predict adverse outcomes in recurrent prostate cancer?

2020· article· en· W3085395192 on OpenAlexaff
Hanan Goldberg, Rachel Glicksman, Dixon Woon, Ally Hoffman, Hina Shaikh, Thenappan Chandrasekar, Zachary Klaassen, Christopher J.D. Wallis, Ardalan E. Ahmad, Noelia Sanmamed‐Salgado, Xuanlu Qu, Fábio Ynoe de Moraes, Eleftherios P. Diamandis, Alejandro Berlín, Neil Fleshner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerCohortBiochemical recurrenceProstatectomyInternal medicineProspective cohort studyOncologyRetrospective cohort studyProportional hazards modelMetastasisCancerRadiation therapyUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether free PSA ratio (FPSAR) at biochemical recurrence (BCR) can predict metastasis, castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and cancer-specific survival (CSS), following therapy for localised disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study (NCT03927287) including a discovery cohort composed of patients with an FPSAR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy (RT) between 2000 and 2017. For validation, an independent Biobank cohort of patients with BCR after RP was tested. Using a defined FPSAR cut-off, the metastasis-free-survival (MFS), CRPC-free survival, and CSS were compared. Multivariable Cox models determined the association between post-treatment FPSAR, metastases, and CRPC. RESULTS: Overall, 822 patients (305 RP- and 363 RT-treated patients and 154 Biobank patients) were analysed. In the RP cohort, a total of 272/305 (89.1%) and 33/305 (10.9%) had a FPSAR test incidentally and reflexively, respectively. In the RT cohort, 155/363 (42.7%) and 208/263 (57.3%) had a FPSAR test incidentally and reflexively, respectively. However, in the prospective Biobank RP cohort, FPSAR testing was done on all samples of patients diagnosed with BCR. A FPSAR cut-off of 0.10 was determined using receiver operating characteristic analyses in both the RP and RT cohorts. A FPSAR of <0.10 resulted in longer median MFS (14.8 vs 9.3 years and 14.8 vs 13 years, respectively), and longer median CRPC-free survival (median not reached vs 9.9 years and 20.7 vs 13.8 years, respectively). Multivariable analyses showed that a FPSAR of ≥0.10 was associated with increased metastasis in the RP cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 1.915, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.241-2.955) and RT cohort (HR 1.754, 95% CI 1.112-2.769), and increased CRPC in the RP cohort (HR 2.470, 95% CI 1.493-4.088). Findings were validated in the Biobank cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A post-treatment FPSAR of ≥0.10 is associated with more aggressive disease, suggesting a potentially novel role for this biomarker.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207