Patients with oropharyngeal cancer: A comparison of adults living independently and patients living in long-term care facilities.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The low survival rate of persons with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) is directly related to the size of the primary tumor, lymph node involvement and to the smoking history. The association between medical independence and the survival rate of oral cancer is unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess the survival rate of institutionalized patients with oral cancer compared to those living independently. Information regarding gender, age, tobacco habits, disease characteristics, and survival status were recorded and statistically analyzed from 30 patients with oral cancer who were institutionalized compared to 543 patients with oral cancer who were non-institutionalized. Patients living in long-term care facilities (LTC) were significantly older than the independent patients (67% were 70 years or older versus 28% of independent patients) (p = 0.0001). No differences in smoking habits were noted between the two groups but more patients who were institutionalized stopped smoking at the time of diagnosis (p = 0.47). More patients who were institutionalized were diagnosed with positive lymph node involvement (p = 0.09). Significantly higher all-cause and disease-free 5-year survival rates were noted in the patients living independently, compared to the adults who were institutionalized (32% and 60% compared to 7% and 26% respectively; p < 0.05). The disease-specific 5-year survival was directly related to age (p = 0.001), size of the tumor (p = 0.001), and lymph node involvement (p < 0.001). Significant longer survival rates were observed for patients living independently. The more advanced disease seen in the patients who were institutionalized may be due to a delay in diagnosis, which may be associated with fewer symptoms, limited report of symptoms, a lack of attention or a misdiagnosis of the oral lesion.
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".