Prognostic factors for T1–T2 squamous cell carcinomas of the mobile tongue: A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify factors predicting poor prognosis at the time of early oral tongue carcinoma diagnosis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was carried out on 70 patients with T1 or T2 squamous cell carcinoma of the mobile tongue treated with primary surgical treatment. RESULTS: In all, 47% of patients received adjuvant treatment. Local recurrence was observed in 29% and regional recurrence in 26%. With a median follow-up of 7.3 years for living patients, 5-year actuarial overall, disease-specific, and disease-free survival rates were 48%, 61%, and 42%, respectively. The presence of poor histological differentiation increased the overall risk of death. Tumor thickness and posterior lingual location independently increased overall and disease-specific risk of death. Concurrent or previous diagnosis of oral lichen significantly increased the risk of disease-specific death and disease recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This study corroborates several known prognostic factors and indicates that diagnosis of oral lichen planus may be a risk factor for disease recurrence.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".