Direct Comparison of Two Different Definitions with Biochemical Recurrence after Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to determine whether biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who received low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) differed according to the definition of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) and the definition given by the Japanese Prostate Cancer Outcome Study of Permanent Iodine-125 Seed Implantation (J-POPS). We reviewed the clinical records of 476 consecutive patients with PCa who received LDR-BT at the Gifu University Hospital. The primary endpoint of this study was the difference in BRFS between the two aforementioned definitions. When the follow-up period ended, 74 (15.5%) and 20 (4.2%) patients had BCR according to the RP and J-POPS definitions, respectively. The 5-year BRFS rates were 85.0% and 96.9% for the RP and J-POPS definitions, respectively (p < 0.005). According to the RP definition, the 5-year BRFS rates were 80.6% in the group aged <63 years and 86.6% in those aged ≥63 years (p = 0.050). According to the J-POPS definition, the 5-year BRFS rates were 94.1% and 97.8% in the groups aged <63 years and ≥63 years, respectively (p = 0.005). The definition of recurrence in LDR-BT may need to be reconsidered.
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 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".