MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367280847 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.oa.22.00070

Predicting Pathological Fractures at Metastatic Humeral Lesions

2023· article· en· W4367280847 on OpenAlexaff
Jimmy Tat, David Bodansky, Ujash Sheth, Yee Ung, Cari Whyne, Diane Nam

Bibliographic record

VenueJBJS Open Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalReceiver operating characteristicLogistic regressionOdds ratioMalignancyProportional hazards modelCutoffRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineSurgeryHazard ratioRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The humerus is the second most common site of metastatic disease involving long bones, yet it is still unclear which patients are at high risk for a fracture and may require prophylactic surgical fixation. The goal of this study was to assess the validity of the Mirels score to predict fractures of metastatic lesions in the humerus. Methods: We performed a retrospective electronic chart review of patients with humeral metastases at our institution (2005 to 2021), with 188 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. Sixty-one of the patients developed a fracture during follow-up. The metastatic humeral lesions were scored according to the Mirels rating system and additional radiographic criteria (cortical breach, location within the humerus, number of lesions). The predictive value of each Mirels score cutoff for fracture was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and multivariate logistic regression. Survivorship until fracture was analyzed for each Mirels score cutoff using Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test. Significance was set at p < 0.01. Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, side of the lesion, type of malignancy, and radiation dose between the groups with and without fracture (all p > 0.01). A Mirels score of ≥8 points had the best predictive profile, with sensitivity of 83.6%, specificity of 79.5%, and AUC of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.88, p < 0.01). A logistic regression model also demonstrated that a Mirels score of ≥8 (odds ratio = 5.8, 95% CI = 1.9 to 18.2, p < 0.01) and a cortical breach (odds ratio = 21.0, 95% CI = 5.7 to 77.2, p < 0.01) were significant predictors of pathological fracture. No other radiographic characteristics were found to be significant predictors of fracture. Conclusions: This study indicated that a Mirels score of ≥8 points had the best predictive profile for anticipating fractures at a metastasis in the humerus. This is in contrast to the traditional Mirels definition of an impending pathological fracture that is used for the lower extremity, a score of ≥9. Additionally, the presence of a cortical breach was a significant predictor of fracture risk. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBJS Open AccessSame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207