MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289833892 · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.011

Local Failure Events in Prostate Cancer Treated with Radiotherapy: A Pooled Analysis of 18 Randomized Trials from the Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate Consortium (LEVIATHAN)

2022· review· en· W4289833892 on OpenAlexaff
Ting Martin, Fang‐I Chu, Howard M. Sandler, Felix Y. Feng, Jason A. Efstathiou, Christopher U. Jones, Mack Roach, Seth A. Rosenthal, Thomas M. Pisansky, Jeff M. Michalski, M. Bolla, Theo M. de Reijke, P. Maingon, Anouk Neven, James W. Denham, Allison Steigler, David Joseph, Abdenour Nabid, Luís Souhami, Nathalie Carrier, Luca Incrocci, Wilma D. Heemsbergen, Floris J. Pos, Matthew R. Sydes, David P. Dearnaley, Alison Tree, Isabel Syndikus, Emma Hall, Clare Cruickshank, Shawn Malone, Soumyajit Roy, Yilun Sun, Nicholas G. Zaorsky, Nicholas G. Nickols, Robert E. Reiter, Matthew B. Rettig, Michael L. Steinberg, Vishruth K. Reddy, Michael Xiang, Tahmineh Romero, Daniel E. Spratt, Amar U. Kishan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalMcGill University Health CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
FundersJonsson Comprehensive Cancer CenterMedical Research CouncilAmerican Society for Radiation OncologyNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAmerican Cancer SocietyViewRayRadiological Society of North AmericaNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UKProstate Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerHazard ratioInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapyConfidence intervalOncologyCancerProportional hazards modelRelative riskMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: The prognostic importance of local failure after definitive radiotherapy (RT) in National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic impact of local failure and the kinetics of distant metastasis following RT. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A pooled analysis was performed on individual patient data of 12 533 PCa (6288 high-risk and 6245 intermediate-risk) patients enrolled in 18 randomized trials (conducted between 1985 and 2015) within the Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate Consortium. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard (PH) models were developed to evaluate the relationship between overall survival (OS), PCa-specific survival (PCSS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and local failure as a time-dependent covariate. Markov PH models were developed to evaluate the impact of specific transition states. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The median follow-up was 11 yr. There were 795 (13%) local failure events and 1288 (21%) distant metastases for high-risk patients and 449 (7.2%) and 451 (7.2%) for intermediate-risk patients, respectively. For both groups, 81% of distant metastases developed from a clinically relapse-free state (cRF state). Local failure was significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.30), PCSS (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.75-2.33), and DMFS (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.75-2.15, p < 0.01 for all) in high-risk patients. Local failure was also significantly associated with DMFS (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36-1.81) but not with OS in intermediate-risk patients. Patients without local failure had a significantly lower HR of transitioning to a PCa-specific death state than those who had local failure (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21-0.50, p < 0.001). At later time points, more distant metastases emerged after a local failure event for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Local failure is an independent prognosticator of OS, PCSS, and DMFS in high-risk and of DMFS in intermediate-risk PCa. Distant metastasis predominantly developed from the cRF state, underscoring the importance of addressing occult microscopic disease. However a "second wave" of distant metastases occurs subsequent to local failure events, and optimization of local control may reduce the risk of distant metastasis. PATIENT SUMMARY: Among men receiving definitive radiation therapy for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, about 10% experience local recurrence, and they are at significantly increased risks of further disease progression. About 80% of patients who develop distant metastasis do not have a detectable local recurrence preceding it.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.045
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations62
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean UrologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207