MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388589123 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noad179.0793

NCMP-09. THE CURRENT LANDSCAPE OF SPINE ONCOLOGY SURGICAL TRIALS AND FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES

2023· article· en· W4388589123 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander J. Schüpper, Shrey Patel, Jeremy Steinberger, Isabelle M. Germano

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialPopulationInternal medicineObservational studyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Clinical trials have allowed the discovery of successful therapeutic intervention for cancer patients. The current number of cancer patients in the US has increased with an incidence of 442/100,000 population and yet with decreased yearly mortality rate. Spine metastatic disease occurs in approximately 90% of patients with cancer. The aim of this study is to analyze the current landscape of spine oncology trials to identify future opportunities. METHODS To assess active and ongoing clinical trials in the treatment of metastatic spinal disease, the authors queried https://clinicaltrials.gov/ under the searches “Spine Metastases” and “Spine Tumor.” Only clinical trials designated as “Recruiting” were included. Parametric and non-parametric statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS Our initial search yielded to 100 total studies; 18 clinical trials met entry criteria. Trial type was 16/18 therapeutic, 2/18 observational and trial design 6/18 (33%) randomized. All 18 trials were single center. Trials were were based in the United States (90%) and British Columbia, Canada. Across US geographical quadrants, a significant higher number of therapeutic trials was found in the South quadrant (12/16) compared to the other quadrants, (p< 0.001; Midwest: N=3/16, Northeast: N=1). The most common therapeutic focus included radiosurgery, followed by vertebral body augmentation and/or radiofrequency ablation, and laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT). CONCLUSION Clinical trials are a cornerstone for the advancement oncological treatment. Our study shows that currently there is an ample opportunity to design clinical trials for our growing population of metastatic spine disease patients. Successful strategies to enhance the needed portfolio of spinal oncology trials, include focusing on including all US geographic quadrants. As new trials are designed, continued efforts devoted to data entry in national registry remains important.

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)0.216
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.379
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2160.379
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0160.012
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.015

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207