MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401478628 · doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.06.023

Intraoperative margin assessment with near real time pathology during partial gland ablation of prostate cancer: A feasibility study

2024· article· en· W4401478628 on OpenAlexaff
Miles P. Mannas, Fang‐Ming Deng, Adrian Ion‐Mărgineanu, Christian W. Freudiger, Derek Jones, Deepthi Hoskoppal, Jonathan Melamed, James Wysock, Daniel A. Orringer, Samir S. Taneja

Bibliographic record

VenueUrologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerAblationMargin (machine learning)ProstateSurgical marginCancerHistologyPathologyRadiologyInternal medicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In-field or in-margin recurrence after partial gland cryosurgical ablation (PGCA) of prostate cancer (PCa) remains a limitation of the paradigm. Stimulated Raman histology (SRH) is a novel microscopic technique allowing real time, label-free, high-resolution microscopic images of unprocessed, un-sectioned tissue which can be interpreted by humans or artificial intelligence (AI). We evaluated surgical team and AI interpretation of SRH for real-time pathologic feedback in the planning and treatment of PCa with PGCA. METHODS: About 12 participants underwent prostate mapping biopsies during PGCA of their PCa between January and June 2022. Prostate biopsies were immediately scanned in a SRH microscope at 20 microns depth using 2 Raman shifts to create SRH images which were interpreted by the surgical team intraoperatively to guide PGCA, and retrospectively assessed by AI. The cores were then processed, hematoxylin and eosin stained as per normal pathologic protocols and used for ground truth pathologic assessment. RESULTS: Surgical team interpretation of SRH intraoperatively revealed 98.1% accuracy, 100% sensitivity, 97.3% specificity for identification of PCa, while AI showed a 97.9% accuracy, 100% sensitivity and 97.5% specificity for identification of clinically significant PCa. 3 participants' PGCA treatments were modified after SRH visualized PCa adjacent to an expected MRI predicted tumor margin or at an untreated cryosurgical margin. CONCLUSION: SRH allows for accurate rapid identification of PCa in PB by a surgical team interpretation or AI. PCa tumor mapping and margin assessment during PGCA appears to be feasible and accurate. Further studies evaluating impact on clinical outcomes are warranted.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrologic Oncology Seminars and Original InvestigationsSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207