The Epidemic of Human Papillomavirus and Oropharyngeal Cancer in a Canadian Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infection with the human papillomavirus (hpv) is responsible for a significant burden of human cancers involving the cervix, anogenital tract, and oropharynx. Studies in the United States and Europe have demonstrated an alarming increase in the frequency of hpv-positive oropharyngeal cancer, but the same direct evidence does not exist in Canada. METHODS: Using the London Health Sciences Centre pathology database, we identified tonsillar cancers diagnosed between 1993 and 2011. Real-time polymerase chain reaction was then used on pre-treatment primary-site biopsy samples to test for dna from the high-risk hpv types 16 and 18. The study cohort was divided into three time periods: 1993-1999, 2000-2005, and 2006-2011. RESULTS: Of 160 tumour samples identified, 91 (57%) were positive for hpv 16. The total number of tonsillar cancers significantly increased from 1993-1999 to 2006-2011 (32 vs. 68), and the proportion of cases that were hpv-positive substantially increased (25% vs. 62%, p < 0.002). Those changes were associated with a marked improvement in 5-year overall survival (39% in 1993-1999 vs. 84% in 2006-2011, p < 0.001). When all factors were included in a multivariable model, only hpv status predicted treatment outcome. INTERPRETATION: The present study is the first to provide direct evidence that hpv-related oropharyngeal cancer is increasing in incidence in a Canadian population. Given the long lag time between hpv infection and clinically apparent malignancy, oropharyngeal cancer will be a significant clinical problem for the foreseeable future despite vaccination efforts.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".