Metastasectomy in synovial sarcoma: A systematic review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e23555 Background: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a malignancy with high metastatic potential. The role of metastasectomy in SS is unclear, with limited data on prognostic factors and clinical outcomes. In this systematic review, we evaluate the survival outcomes post-metastasectomy for patients with SS. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken following PRISMA guidelines. English studies reporting survival outcomes among adults and children with SS undergoing metastasectomy were evaluated. Databases were searched from inception to May 31, 2021, and included Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers independently undertook literature evaluation and screening, data extraction and grading of studies. Risk of bias assessments utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series. Qualitative data was summarized in descriptive format, and survival outcome data were assessed for meta-analysis. Results: Thirteen retrospective studies, published between 1993 to 2017, were included, six were cohort studies, and seven were case series. A total of 598 patients with SS were included, of whom 462 had metastatic pulmonary disease, and 309 underwent metastasectomy. The median ages of the study cohorts ranged from 14 to 51 years. The median survival period after metastasectomy ranged from 21 to 80 months. The most common prognostic factors associated with survival included a disease-free interval (DFI) of greater than 12 months and complete resection of the metastases. Conclusions: The current literature has demonstrated that metastasectomy, particularly pulmonary, is a reasonable treatment option for appropriately selected patients with metastatic SS. Individuals with a DFI of greater than one year and who can safely undergo a complete resection appear the derive the greatest benefit. Registration: This protocol has been registered within the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) database (registration ID: CRD42019126906).
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 | 0.007 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".