MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310380218 · doi:10.1016/j.prro.2022.09.007

Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: The First Results from the MOMENTUM study—An International Registry for the Evidence-Based Introduction of Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy

2022· article· en· W4310380218 on OpenAlexaff
Frederik R. Teunissen, T. Willigenburg, Alison Tree, William A. Hall, Seungtaek Choi, Ananya Choudhury, John P. Christodouleas, Johannes C.J. de Boer, Eline N. de Groot-van Breugel, Linda G.W. Kerkmeijer, Floris J. Pos, Tine Schytte, Danny Vesprini, Helena M. Verkooijen, Jochem R.N. van der Voort van Zyp

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical Radiation Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesMedical Research CouncilManchester Biomedical Research CentreZonMwRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustDepartment of Health and Social CareAccurayNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer ResearchRosetrees TrustEuropean CommissionElektaProstate Cancer UKCancer Research UKMedical College of WisconsinAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingProstate cancerRadiation therapyMedical physicsProstateCancerRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) is a new technique for treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). We report the 12-month outcomes for the first PCa patients treated within an international consortium (the MOMENTUM study) on a 1.5T MR-Linac system with ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients treated with 5 × 7.25 Gy were identified. Prostate specific antigen-level, physician-reported toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]), and patient-reported outcomes (Quality of Life Questionnaire PR25 and Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 questionnaires) were recorded at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up (FU). Pairwise comparative statistics were conducted to compare outcomes between baseline and FU. RESULTS: The study included 425 patients with localized PCa (11.4% low, 82.0% intermediate, and 6.6% high-risk), and 365, 313, and 186 patients reached 3-, 6-, and 12-months FU, respectively. Median prostate specific antigen level declined significantly to 1.2 ng/mL and 0.1 ng/mL at 12 months FU for the nonandrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) and ADT group, respectively. The peak of genitourinary and gastrointestinal CTCAE toxicity was reported at 3 months FU, with 18.7% and 1.7% grade ≥2, respectively. The QLQ-PR25 questionnaire outcomes showed significant deterioration in urinary domain score at all FU moments, from 8.3 (interquartile range [IQR], 4.1-16.6) at baseline to 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-24.8; P = .005) at 3 months, 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-20.8; P = .018;) at 6 months, and 12.4 (IQR, 8.3-20.8; P = .001) at 12 months. For the non-ADT group, physician- and patient-reported erectile function worsened significantly between baseline and 12 months FU. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrahypofractionated MR-guided radiation therapy for localized PCa using a 1.5T MR-Linac is effective and safe. The peak of CTCAE genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity was reported at 3 months FU. Furthermore, for patients without ADT, a significant increase in CTCAE erectile dysfunction was reported at 12 months FU. These data are useful for educating patients on expected outcomes and informing study design of future comparative-effectiveness studies.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations47
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractical Radiation OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207