MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115767896 · doi:10.1177/0003134820954834

Positron Emission Tomography Combined With Computed Tomography vs. No Positron Emission Tomography Combined With Computed Tomography for the Management of Patients With Resectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases and Synchronous Extrahepatic Disease

2020· article· en· W3115767896 on OpenAlex
Pablo E. Serrano, Chu‐Shu Gu, Carol-Anne Moulton, Steven Gallinger

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Surgeon · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMcMaster UniversityOntario Clinical Oncology Group
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicinePositron emission tomographyHazard ratioConfidence intervalColorectal cancerNuclear medicineRadiologyPET-CTPositron Emission Tomography-Computed TomographyProportional hazards modelCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Selected patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) and synchronous extrahepatic disease (EHD) are considered for surgery. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the change in surgical management and long-term survival (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]) for patients with CRLM and EHD who undergo positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET-CT) vs no PET-CT. METHODS: Patients with CRLM were enrolled in a trial evaluating the effect of PET-CT (vs no PET-CT) on surgical management, DFS, and OS. This is a sub-study of the trial, including only patients with synchronous EHD. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate risks for recurrence and death. Survival were described by Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 25 patients with EHD (PET-CT arm: 14/270 (5%) and no PET-CT arm: 11/134 (8%)), PET-CT changed surgical management in 14%, all of which avoided liver resection due to more extensive disease. Complete metastasectomy was achieved in 36% (5/14) and 72% (8/11), respectively. Respectively, PET-CT vs no PET-CT had statistically similar median DFS, 5.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-18) vs 7.6 months (95% CI 2.9-15) and median OS, 42 months (95% CI 25-48) vs 29 months (95% CI 17-41). EHD was associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio HR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.41-2.52) and OS (HR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.6-3.83). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative PET-CT for the management of resectable CRLM did not improve long-term outcomes among patients who had synchronous EHD; however, it changed surgical management in a relatively significant proportion of patients.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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