Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oncologic outcomes for sinonasal and skull base squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) treated with an endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) needs investigation. METHODS: Patients with SCC treated with EEA were stratified by treatment strategy and tumor etiology and reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were treated with EEA, or which 27 had definitive resection and 7 had debulking surgery. In the definitive group, 17 had de novo tumors and 10 had tumors arising from inverted papilloma. Definitive resection was associated with better 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) than debulking (62% vs 17%; p = .02; and 78% vs 30%; p = .03). Patients with de novo tumors had similar 5-year DFS and OS to those arising from inverted papilloma (62% vs 62%; p = .75; and 75% vs 86%; p = .24). CONCLUSION: Definitive resection of sinonasal SCC with EEA provides sound oncologic outcomes. SCC arising from inverted papilloma does not have prognostic significance.
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 | 0.000 | 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".