Ablative Therapies for Localized Primary Renal Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surgery with either partial or radical nephrectomy remains the standard of care for localized primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, most RCCs are detected in an older age group, and some may have multiple comorbidities that preclude surgery. Thermal ablation (TA) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoablation (CA), or microwave ablation (MWA) is considered an alternative to extirpative surgical procedures for select patients with small renal tumors. There is more than 90% post-ablation local control in carefully selected patients with reported complication rates of less than 10%. Most thermal ablation require only a single procedure. More recently, stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) has emerged as an attractive noninvasive treatment modality for elderly patients with comorbidities and localized RCC. It has shown more than 90% local control rates for both small and relatively larger tumors (> 4 cm). Modest post-SABR renal function decline has been observed. Despite most patients presenting with mild or moderate chronic kidney disease there is less than a 5% chance of progression to end-stage renal disease. This article aims to summarize the key evidence and ablative treatment’s optimal patient selection, efficacy, and toxicity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".