MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124101675 · doi:10.1007/s40487-020-00135-z

Recent Advances in the Management of Penile Cancer: A Contemporary Review of the Literature

2021· review· en· W3124101675 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Stecca, Marie Alt, Di Jiang, Peter Chung, Juanita Crook, Girish S. Kulkarni, Srikala S. Sridhar

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology and Therapy · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBC Cancer AgencyPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenile cancerMedicineDiseaseIntensive care medicineMultidisciplinary approachHuman papilloma virusCancerClinical trialInternal medicineCervical cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penile cancer is a rare condition, which mostly affects men in their sixth decade of life. The most common histology is squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), with about half of the cases linked to human papilloma virus (HPV) infection. The lack of awareness and significant social and psychological stigma associated with penile cancer often leads to delays in presentation, diagnosis and management. Timely multidisciplinary care at experienced centers is therefore critical for improving outcomes. For patients with advanced disease, treatment options are limited and prognosis remains poor. Large international efforts are underway to further define the optimal standards of care. Targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors could potentially play a role in advanced disease and are under evaluation in clinical trials. In this review, we discuss the current management of penile cancer and future directions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology and TherapySame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207