Association between radiation dose and pathological complete response after preoperative radiochemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This study was undertaken to examine the impact of radiation dose on pathological complete response (pCR) rates following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (N-RCT) for squamous cell esophageal cancer (ESCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 1988 to 2011, 218 patients were treated with 30-30.6 Gy (1.8-2 Gy per fraction), 39.6-40 Gy (1.8-2 Gy per fraction) or 44-45 Gy (1.8-2 Gy per fraction) and concomitant cisplatin ± 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin + 5-FU or 5-FU alone. The most commonly used concomitant chemotherapy was continuous infusion of 5-FU-alone with a dose of 300 mg/m(2)/day during the whole course of treatment (n=111). To eliminate the dispersing effect of potentially different efficacy levels of these drug regimens on pCR, we excluded patients with regimens other than 5-FU-alone. RESULTS: Histomorphological regression grade 1a (0% residual tumor), 1b (<10% residual tumor), 2 (10-50% residual tumor) and 3 (>50% residual tumor) was observed in 26 (23%), 24 (22%), 36 (32%) and 25 (23%) patients, respectively. pCR was observed in 9 out of 71 (13%) patients treated with 30 Gy-30.6 Gy, 13 of 34 (38%) patients treated with 39.6-40 Gy and 4 of 6 (67%) patients treated with 44-45 Gy (p=0.001). Median follow-up time from the start of N-RCT was 191 months (range=2-262 months). The estimated 5-year overall survival (OS) was 33% for the whole cohort. OS at 5 years was 58% for patients with pCR compared to 25% for patients with less favorable response to N-RCT (p=0.009), respectively. CONCLUSION: The dose of radiation correlates significantly with the likelihood of achieving a pCR in stage II/III squamous cell esophageal cancer patients. Prospective randomized trials are required to definitively evaluate the impact of application of higher radiation doses on efficacy and safety/tolerability in the context of N-RCT on the clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".