MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411242214 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32060347

Planned Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Residual Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases After Surgery: A Single-Arm Retrospective Study

2025· article· en· W4411242214 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sixuan Li, Dezuo Dong, Xuan Zheng, Hongzhi Wang, Kun Wang, Baocai Xing, Weihu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBeijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding Support
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerRetrospective cohort studyRadiation therapyStereotactic radiotherapyCancerGeneral surgeryRadiologySurgeryInternal medicineRadiosurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the promising outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in treating colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLMs), we proposed an innovative strategy combining surgery with planned liver SBRT for CRLMs. This retrospective study included patients who underwent curative-intent surgery combined with planned liver SBRT from July 2019 to October 2023. Planned liver SBRT was delivered to residual unresectable and unablatable lesions with maximum diameters of ≤5 cm. Outcomes included local failure (LF), intrahepatic recurrence-free survival (IHRFS), extrahepatic recurrence-free survival (EHRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and radiation-related adverse events. A total of 69 patients were included. The 1-, and 2-year cumulative incidence rates of LF after SBRT were 7.7%, and 9.6%, respectively. The median PFS was 6.2 months, and the median OS was 45.8 months. Multivariate analysis identified RAS/BRAF mutations, extrahepatic metastases excluding lung involvement, and higher CEA as independent predictors of poorer OS. Intrahepatic recurrence was the predominant pattern of first disease progression after combination treatment. Acute grade 1-2 radiation-related adverse events occurred in 56.5% of patients, while grade 3 toxicities were reported in 4.3%. This approach offers favorable long-term outcomes, suggesting its potential to broaden the indications for curative-intent local treatments in CRLMs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis→French-language works237,207→