Evaluating Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Radiofrequency Ablation for T1a Renal Cell Carcinoma with Minimum 10 Years of Follow-Up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: We aimed to assess long-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for biopsy-proven renal cell carcinoma (RCC), with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients who underwent RFA for renal masses at our center between 2004 and 2014. All patients who underwent RFA for a single, unilateral renal mass measuring ≤4 cm and had a minimum follow-up of 10 years were included. Our primary outcome was RCC recurrence. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to identify recurrence-free, metastasis-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival rates. Multivariate binary logistic regression was used to determine predictors of recurrence. Results: A total of 75 patients were included in our study. Median follow-up was 131 months (interquartile range [IQR], 109–151 months). Median tumor size was 2.7 cm (IQR, 2.1–3.3 cm), and the median RENAL nephrometry score was 7 (IQR, 5–8). A total of 70.7% of pathology results showed clear cell RCC. Nine patients experienced RCC recurrence with a median time to recurrence of 54.4 months (IQR, 17.3–70.3 months). Two patients died due to metastatic RCC, and median time to death was 97.5 months (IQR, 55.8–128 months). Overall recurrence-free survival was 88%, and cancer-specific survival was 97%. No patients developed recurrence after 10 years. Univariate and multivariate regression did not identify any predictors of recurrence. Conclusion: RFA is a safe and effective treatment option for T1a RCC. Rates of recurrence and cancer-specific mortality are low at 10 years postprocedure. No patient or tumor factors were identified as predictors for RCC recurrence.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".