Temporal trends in the incidence and survival of cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract in Ontario and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) databases were used to describe temporal trends in the incidence and survival of squamous cancers of the upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) in Ontario and the US between 1984 and 2001. Between the 1984-86 and 1999-01 periods, the age-adjusted incidence rate of all first primary cancers of the UADT decreased from 11.6 (11.2-12.0) to 8.8 (8.5-9.1) in Ontario and 13.0 (12.7-13.3) to 10.2 (10.0-10.4) in the US. Significant decreases in incidence were observed in many UADT sites but there was no significant change in the incidence of cancer of the oropharynx in either the US or Canada. Over the same period, the 5-year relative survival for all UADT cancers increased from 49.2% (47.2-51.2%) to 57.1%(55.0-59.1%) in Ontario and from 48.1% (46.9-49.3%) to 52.4% (51.2-53.6%) in the US. This significant improvement in the outcome of UADT cancer was largely due to a dramatic increase in the 5-year relative survival for cancers of the oropharynx from 31.1% (27.1-35.1%) to 53.6% (49.3-57.9%) in Ontario and from 35.3% (32.9-37.8%) to 51.0% (48.7-53.3%) in the US. Smaller increases in survival were observed in cancers of the oral cavity, nasopharynx, and hypopharynx, but there was no evidence of any increase in survival for cancer of the larynx. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that there has been a major change in the etiology of cancer of the oropharynx in Canada and the US and a concomitant change in its response to therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".