Salvage prostatectomy post-definitive radiation therapy: The Vancouver experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer recurrence following primary radiationis common. If the recurrence remains localized to the prostate gland, surgical removal may result in long-term local control orcure. Despite the well-established oncological outcomes, salvage prostatectomy is infrequently performed or reported. We present our experience with salvage prostatectomy at a Canadian centre.Methods: We identified all patients undergoing salvage prostatectomy at the Vancouver General Hospital between 1995 and 2010 from a prospectively recorded and maintained prostate cancer database. Details regarding initial presentation, delivery of radiotherapy, clinical features at the time of recurrence, as well as oncological and functional outcomes, were collected. Information regarding postoperative morbidity was collected prospectively and confirmed by retrospective chart review.Results: Over a 15-year period, salvage prostatectomy was successfully completed in 21 patients. With a median follow-up period of 68 months (range: 2-122), 9 (43%) patients experienced a biochemical recurrence, with most failing within the first 2 years of surgery. There were 3 deaths in the cohort, all from prostate cancer, giving a prostate cancer specific and overall survival of 86%. The main postoperative morbidity was bladder neck contracture, occurring in 40%. One patient each developed a recto-urethral fistula andosteitis pubis. Physician-recorded data regarding continence was available in 13 (62%). Of these 13 patients, 10 (85%) men were recorded as dry or using 1 pad per day.Conclusions: This is the first Canadian centre to report that salvage prostatectomy can be performed with favourable oncological and functional outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".