Case – Prostate-specific antigen bounce: A pitfall in prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography interpretation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) “bounce,” a transient rise in PSA post-therapy, can happen after either brachytherapy (BT) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT); however, it is more common in the former case. In general, PSA bounce tends to occur within 2–3 years of treatment, rarely exceeds levels of 2–3 ng/ml above the nadir PSA, and tends to resolve over 6–12 months. Studies have shown that prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) has a high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of prostate cancer recurrence and can potentially guide therapy. Because salvage treatment (such as local or systemic salvage) may have associated morbidity, it is important to exclude the possibility of PSA bounce before proceeding with salvage treatment. We describe a case of clinically suspected local failure with initial PSA rise and suspicious PSMA PET/CT finding post-therapy that was actually related to a PSA bounce, emphasizing the need for caution in the evaluation of men where a PSA bounce may be a confounding phenomenon.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".