Prognostic factors and the effect of treatment with radioactive iodine and external beam radiation on patients with differentiated thyroid cancer seen at a single institution over 40 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic factors and the role of radioactive iodine (RAI) and external beam radiotherapy (RT) in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer. DESIGN: A retrospective review of 729 patients treated between 1958 and 1998. The median follow-up was 11.3 years (range 0.3-39.8 years). Primary outcomes included time to cause-specific survival and time to local-regional relapse. Baseline and treatment variables were assessed for statistical significance using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The 10-year cause-specific survival (CSS) was 87.3% and the 10-year local-regional relapse-free rate (LRFR) was 84.9%. In multivariate analysis there was no statistically significant improvement in CSS with more aggressive treatment (i.e. more extensive surgery, the administration of RAI and/or RT). By multivariate analysis the use of RAI resulted in a statistically significant improvement in LRFR (hazard ratio 0.5; 95% confidence interval 0.3-0.8; P = 0.007). In low-risk patients at AJCC stage I < or = 45 years, there was no apparent benefit from RAI. For patients over 60, with extrathyroid extension but no gross residual disease (n = 70), adjuvant external RT resulted in statistically significantly higher CSS (10-year CSS 81.0%vs. 64.6%, P = 0.04) and LRFR (10-year LRFR 86.4%vs. 65.7%, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of RAI was associated with improved LRFR but not in low-risk patients. External beam RT improved LRFR and CSS in high-risk patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".