MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311673710 · doi:10.1186/s13014-022-02173-5

Focal HDR brachytherapy boost to stereotactic radiotherapy (fBTsRT) for prostate cancer: a phase II randomized controlled trial

2022· article· en· W4311673710 on OpenAlexaff
C. Belliveau, Maroie Barkati, Guila Delouya, Daniel Taussky, M. Beauchemin, Carole Lambert, Luc Beaulieu, D. Béliveau-Nadeau, Benedicte Nicolas, Jean‐François Carrier, Éric Vigneault, Cynthia Ménard

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersAstellas Pharma
KeywordsMedicineBrachytherapyCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsProstate cancerClinical endpointRadiation therapyRandomized controlled trialProstateCancerOncologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: For patients with a higher burden of localized prostate cancer, radiation dose escalation with brachytherapy boosts have improved cancer control outcomes at the cost of urinary toxicity. We hypothesize that a focal approach to brachytherapy boosts targeting only grossly visualized tumor volumes (GTV) combined with stereotactic radiotherapy will improve quality of life (QoL) outcomes without compromising cancer control. METHODS: 150 patients with intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer will be enrolled and randomized 1:1 in a cohort multiple randomized clinical trial phase 2 design. Patients are eligible if planned for standard-of-care (SOC) high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost to radiotherapy (RT) with GTVs encompassing < 50% of the prostate gland. Those randomly selected will be offered the experimental treatment, consisting of focal HDR brachytherapy boost (fBT) of 13-15 Gy in 1 fraction followed by stereotactic radiotherapy (sRT) 36.25-40 Gy in 5 fractions to the prostate (+/- 25 Gy to the elective pelvis) delivered every other day. The primary endpoint is to determine if fBTsRT is superior to SOC by having fewer patients experience a minimally important decline (MID) in urinary function as measured by EPIC-26 at 1 and 2 years. Secondary endpoints include rates of toxicity measured by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), and failure-free survival outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will determine whether a novel approach for the treatment of localized prostate cancer, fBTsRT, improves QoL and merits further evaluation. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04100174 as a companion to registry NCT03378856 on September 24, 2019.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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