Chemoradiation Compared to Surgery Alone in Patients With Non- Metastatic Esophageal Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To assess overall survival (OS) of esophageal cancer patients treated either by esophagectomy or chemoradiation (CRT). Methods: The medical records of patients with non metastatic esophageal cancer, treated with esophagectomy and those treated with concurrent CRT were analyzed. For all patients, files were reviewed for age, sex, tumor site and type, grade, disease stage and survival. The Log- rank test was used to examine differences in OS rates. Results: The medical records of 90 patients were analyzed. After a median follow up of 20 months, 2-year OS rate for the whole group was 46%. There was significant differences in 2-year OS in favor of patients treated by concurrent CRT (55.4%) compared to those treated by surgery (31%) (p=0.016, HR:1.96, 95% CI: 1.13–3.38). Univariate analysis showed that patients in each treatment group, had comparable 2-year OS rates regarding patient’s age, gender, pathologic subtype, and histologic grade (p>0.05). Disease stage in each group and tumor site in CRT group significantly affected OS rates (p<0.05). Conclusions: Survival rates were statistically significant higher in patients treated with CRT than in those underwent esophagectomy. Prognostic factors that affected survival were disease stage in each treatment group and tumor site in CRT group.
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".