Risk of second primary malignancies after nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A population‐based cohort study in Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the risk of second primary malignancy (SPM) after nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: We compared the incidence of SPM in patients diagnosed with NPC at the end of 2009 using the data extracted from the Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database between 2001 and 2008 (n = 10,299), with age-matched controls (1:10; n = 102,990). RESULTS: We found a 55% increased risk of SPM in patients diagnosed with NPC, compared to the risk of first malignancy in the age-matched controls (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.55; p < .0001). Although the diagnosis of SPM was negatively correlated with the survival of patients with NPC (p = .0011), primary NPC did not display any synergic effect on the survival of patients with SPM, compared to age-matched controls with a newly diagnosed malignancy (p = .8986). CONCLUSION: NPC is associated with an increased risk of developing an SPM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".