MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303628223 · doi:10.3390/curroncol29100583

Acute Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: Urgent Surgery versus Radiotherapy and Treatment Result Prediction versus Actual Results

2022· article· en· W4303628223 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oded Hershkovich, Mojahed Sakhnini, Sharif Gara, Israel Caspi, Raphael Lotan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyContext (archaeology)Retrospective cohort studySpinal cord compressionSurgeryPerformance statusCohortSpinal cordOverall survivalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Context: The role of radiotherapy versus surgery in treating acute metastatic spinal cord compression (AMSCC) has changed over the years. Purpose: Our study evaluates neurological and functional outcomes following urgent surgery and radiotherapy (USFR) versus urgent radiotherapy alone in treating AMSCC. Study Design/Setting: A retrospective cohort of 54 patients with AMSCC with variable neurological deficits. Overall, 32 patients were treated with USFR, and 22 received urgent radiotherapy alone. Outcome Measures: Neurological status regarding the Asia and Frankel scores, continence and ambulation, and Kranofsky’s functional score and patient life span comprised the outcome measures. Methods: This was a retrospective EMR study. Results: USFR and radiotherapy cohorts were similar in age, gender, tumor origin, and the number of spinal metastases. The most common cause of AMSCC was carcinoma of the breast (24.1%), followed by carcinoma of the lung (16.7%) and multiple myeloma (13%). Neurological status at AMSCC presentation was similar between cohorts regarding Asia and Frankel scores, continence and ambulation, and Kranofsky’s functional score. Following USFR, 59.3% of the patients had a motor strength improvement, 31.3% regained sphincter function, and 34.4% regained ambulation, while 90% of the patients treated by radiotherapy did not show any improvement. One patient under radiotherapy lost sphincter function. The treatment received did not affect the patient’s survival. A subanalysis of patients with a short life expectancy, by Tomita and Tokuhashi scores, showed missed prediction in 29.4% of cases. Conclusion: The study supports the beneficial effect of UFSR compared to urgent radiotherapy alone in treating AMSCC in all subgroups. Early surgery improved function, motor strength, sphincter control, and ambulation without affecting life span. Prognostic scores failed to predict life span in almost one-third of the patients, requiring further investigation.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207