Combined endoscopic evaluation of the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy of NSCLC using autofluorescence and spectroscopic methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To estimate the informativity of autofluorescence bronchoscopy and spectroscopy for evaluating the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for lung cancer. Material and methods: The study included 46 patients with central NSCLC IIIa/IIIb stage who underwent 2-4 courses of platinum-based NCT. Endoscopy was done before treatment started and repeated each 21 day. Combined endoscopic investigation included: bronchoscopy in conventional mode (CB), spectroscopy in conventional mode (CS), bronchoscopy in autofluorescence mode (AFB) and spectroscopy in autofluorescence mode (AFS). Integrated system for autofluorescence and spectroscopy ClearVu Elite (Perceptronix Med. Inc., Canada) was used. The data obtained were compared with the results of histological study of biopsy samples from the respective sites. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the combination of AFB and AFS was 97.1% and 88.3%, respectively vs. CB and CS - 66,7% and 86,9%, respectively. Combined endoscopy revealed that the NCT was effective in 41,3% cases (n = 19 - partial endoscopic response), in 4 patients (10,3%) endoscopic tumor progression was found. Endobronchial spread of the tumor in 30.4% of cases (p = 0.03) was defined more accurately by AFB and AFS in comparison with CB and CS, it was important for choosing a volume of further resection. In 97,1% of cases, the data AFB and AFS is fully consistent with the results of histological studies (p = 0,02). Conclusions: The combination of AFB and AFS is effective in determination of margins of central lung cancer spread and effectiveness of NCT.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".