MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224087801 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.863848

Imaging Biomarkers in Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: A Review and Clinical Trial Protocol

2022· review· en· W4224087801 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Liu, Andrew Loblaw, David Laidley, Hatim Fakir, Lucas C. Mendez, Melanie Davidson, Zahra Kassam, Ting‐Yim Lee, Aaron D. Ward, Jonathan D. Thiessen, Jane Bayani, John Conyngham, Laura J. Bailey, Joseph Andrews, Glenn Bauman

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoSt Joseph's Health CareSt Joseph's Health CentreHealth Sciences CentreCancer Care OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerContext (archaeology)ProstateRadiosurgeryRadiation therapyRadiologyStereotactic biopsyBiopsyMedical physicsInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in imaging have changed prostate radiotherapy through improved biochemical control from focal boost and improved detection of recurrence. These advances are reviewed in the context of prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and the ARGOS/CLIMBER trial protocol. ARGOS/CLIMBER will evaluate 1) the safety and feasibility of SBRT with focal boost guided by multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 2) imaging and laboratory biomarkers for response to SBRT. To date, response to prostate SBRT is most commonly evaluated using the Phoenix Criteria for biochemical failure. The drawbacks of this approach include lack of lesion identification, a high false-positive rate, and delay in identifying treatment failure. Patients in ARGOS/CLIMBER will receive dynamic 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and mpMRI prior to SBRT for treatment planning and at 6 and 24 months after SBRT to assess response. Imaging findings will be correlated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and biopsy results, with the goal of early, non-invasive, and accurate identification of treatment failure.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207