MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384070541 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdad071.029

STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIOTHERAPY (SBRT) FOR SACRAL METASTASES: DEVIATION FROM RECOMMENDED TARGET VOLUME DELINEATION PREDICTS HIGHER RISK OF LOCAL FAILURE

2023· article· en· W4384070541 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Moore-Palhares, Kang Zeng, Sten Myrehaug, Chia‐Lin Tseng, Hany Soliman, Hanbo Chen, Pejman Maralani, Jérémie Larouche, Jeff Wilson, Mark Ruschin, Beibei Zhang, Eshetu G. Atenafu, Arjun Sahgal, Jay Detsky

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic and Acetabular Injuries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContouringSacrumCumulative incidenceRadiation therapyIncidence (geometry)Vertebral compression fractureNuclear medicineRadiologyInternal medicineSurgeryVertebral body

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Report outcomes after sacrum SBRT, focusing on the impact of contouring deviation on local failure (LF) risk, with an aim to validate the contouring consensus guidelines. METHODS/MATERIALS: Patients who underwent sacral SBRT from 2010- 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Primary outcomes were magnetic resonance-based LF and vertebral compression fracture (VCF). RESULTS: A total of 215 treated sacral segments in 112 patients were reviewed. Most segments were treated with 30 Gy/4 fractions (51%), 24 Gy/2 fractions (31%), or 30 Gy/5 fractions (10%). Thirty-one percent of segments were of radioresistant histology (gastrointestinal, kidney, melanoma, sarcoma, or thyroid primary), and 51% had extraosseous disease. Sixteen percent of segments were under-contoured per consensus guidelines. The cumulative incidence of LF was 18.4% (95% CI 13.5-24.0) at 12-months and 23.1% (95% CI 17.6-29.0) at 24-months. On multivariate analysis (MVA), under- contouring (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.7, p=0.008), radioresistant histology (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1,4-4.1, p=0.001), and extraosseous extension (HR 2.5, 95% CI 1.3-4.7, p=0.005) were predictors of increased risk of LF. The LF rates at 12/24-months were 15.1%/18.8% for segments contoured per guideline versus 31.4%/40.0% for those under-contoured. The cumulative incidence of VCF was 7.1% (95% CI 4.1-11.1) at 12-months and 12.3% (95% CI 8.2-17.2) at 24-months. On MVA, female gender predicted increased VCF risk (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-5.2, p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Sacral SBRT is associated with high rates of efficacy and an acceptable VCF risk. Adherence to target volume delineation consensus guidelines reduces the risk of LF.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicPelvic and Acetabular InjuriesFrench-language works237,207