MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979121364 · doi:10.1002/lary.21226

What treatment for early‐stage glottic carcinoma among adult patients: CO<sub>2</sub> endolaryngeal laser excision versus standard fractionated external beam radiation is superior in terms of cost utility?

2010· review· en· W1979121364 on OpenAlex
Kevin Higgins

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalLaryngectomyOdds ratioSurgeryLarynxInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine which treatment for Tis/T1 glottic carcinoma among adult patients, transoral CO(2) laser excision (TOL) versus external beam radiation (XRT), is superior in terms of cost utility. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis. METHODS: Six head-to-head comparison studies and 22 consecutive case series were identified to examine oncologic control. The case series were pooled as a composite group. Primary end points were local control (LC), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), and overall survival (OS). Objective and subjective voice-quality measures were secondary end points. Third-party payer perspective was adopted for cost-utility analysis. Operational and capital costs were determined with the microcosting method. Rollback calculations and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated with decision-tree modeling. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between TOL surgery and XRT with respect to LC (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.3) and LFS (OR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.42-1.66). The weighted mean difference for OS was 0.03. There were no objective differences for measures of voice quality. Decision-tree analysis was undertaken using mean 5-year local control initial probabilities. CO(2) laser cost $2475.65/case (US $2407.32/case), generating 1.663 QALYs, whereas radiation cost $4965.85/case (US $4828.79/case), generating 1.506 QALYs. This contrasts initial upstream costs for CO(2) laser (∼$1889/case, ∼US $1836.86/case) and radiation (∼$2454.70/case, ∼US $2386.95/case). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that there is no clear difference in oncologic outcome between TOL surgery and XRT. There is a trend for improved post-treatment voice quality with XRT, although the clinical significance of this is questionable. TOL surgery dominates XRT from a cost-utility standpoint primarily because of the enhanced downstream affordability of salvage treatment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it