MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Every-other-day or once-a-week: Long-term efficacy outcomes of the multicenter randomised PATRIOT prostate SBRT trial.

2024· article· en· W4391302763 on OpenAlexaff
Wee Loon Ong, Harvey Quon, Aldrich Ong, Patrick Cheung, William Chu, Hans T. Chung, Danny Vesprini, Amit Chowdhury, Dilip Panjwani, Yasir Alayed, Geordi Pang, Renée Korol, Melanie Davidson, Ananth Ravi, Boyd McCurdy, Liying Zhang, Meghan Kulasingham-Poon, Alexandre Mamedov, Andrea Deabreu, Andrew Loblaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreBC Cancer AgencyCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTerm (time)Prostate cancerProstateRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

325 Background: We aim to report the long-term efficacy outcomes of the PATRIOT trial, a multicenter phase 2 randomised trial of every-other-day (EOD) versus once-a-week (QW) schedule for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer (NCT01423474). Methods: Between January 2012 and November 2013, 152 men with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer were randomised to prostate SBRT 40Gy in 5 fractions, delivered EOD (n=75) or QW (n=77). The oncological outcomes evaluated were biochemical failure (BF) (based on Phoenix criteria), metastases free survival (MFS), prostate cancer specific survival (PCSS) and overall survival (OS). Time-to-event was estimated from the start date of SBRT to event of interest or last follow-up. The cumulative incidence of BF was estimated using the Nelson Aalen estimates, while MFS, PCSS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: The median follow-up for the cohort was 91 months (IQR: 61-116 months). Five men in the EOD arm and eight men in the QW arm developed BF. The 8-year cumulative incidence of BF were 5.5% (SE=0.03) in the EOD arm and 9.6% (SE=0.04) in the QW arm (P=0.3). None of the men in the EOD arm developed metastases, while three men in the QW arm did. The 8-year MFS were 100% in the EOD arm and 95.9% (95%CI=91.4-100%) in the QW arm (P=0.08). Thirteen men had died at last follow-up, of which two were prostate cancer specific death. The 8-year PCSS were 100% in the EOD arm and 97.2% (95%CI=93.5-100%) in the QW arm (P=0.3), while the 8-year OS were 96.0% (95%CI=91.7-100%) in the EOD arm and 85.4% (95%CI=76.4-95.5%) in the QW arm (P=0.3). Conclusions: There are no statistically significant differences in long-term oncological outcomes between EOD and QW for five-fraction prostate SBRT in the PATRIOT trial. However, the trial was powered for acute toxicity differences, and not MFS or OS. Either prostate SBRT schedule could be safely delivered depending on patients’ preference, or for logistic reasons. We plan to combine these data with the Swiss EOD vs QW randomised trial (NCT01764646) to improve the power to detect these important outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01423474 .

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→