MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3172164020 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-611515/v1

Combining Sarcopenia and [18F] FDGPET/CT Derived Metabolic Parameters in Patients with Adenocarcinoma Esophageal Cancer Might Improve Outcome Prediction

2021· preprint· en· W3172164020 on OpenAlexaff
Reut Anconina, Claudia Ortega, Ur Metser, Zhihui Amy Liu, Chihiro Suzuki, Micheal McInnis, Gail Darling, Rebecca Wong, Kirsty Taylor, Jonathan Yeung, Eric Xueyu Chen, Carol J. Swallow, Jaspreet Bajwa, Raymond Woo-Jun Jang, Elena Elimova, Patrick Veit‐Haibach

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineEsophageal cancerStage (stratigraphy)Proportional hazards modelAdenocarcinomaInternal medicineLymphovascular invasionCancerOncologyRadiologyNuclear medicineMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose To determine the prognostic value of sarcopenia measurements done on staging [18F] FDG PET/CT together with metabolic activity of the tumor in patients with adenocarcinoma esophagogastric cancer with surgical treatment. Methods Patients with early stage, surgically treated esophageal adenocarcinoma and available pre-treatment PET/CT were included. The standard uptake value (SUV) and SUV normalized by lean body mass (SUL) were recorded. Skeletal muscle index (SMI) was measured at the L3 level on the CT component of the PET/CT. Sarcopenia was defined as SMI < 34.4cm2/m2 in women and < 45.4cm2/m2 in men. Results Of the included 145 patients. 30% were sarcopenic at baseline. On the univariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, ECOG, surgical T and N staging, Lymphovascular Invasion (LVI) positive lymph nodes and sarcopenia were significant prognostic factors concerning RFS, and OS. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, surgical N staging (p = 0.025) and sarcopenia (p = 0.022) remained significant poor prognostic factors for OS and RFS. Combining the clinical parameters with the imaging derived nutritional evaluation of the patient but not metabolic parameters of the tumor showed improved predictive ability for OS and RFS. Conclusion Combining the patients’ imaging derived sarcopenic status with standard clinical data, but not metabolic parameters offered an overall improved prognostic value concerning OS and RFS.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment→French-language works237,207→