MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985736476 · doi:10.1002/hed.20139

Salvage surgery after radical accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant boost technique for head and neck carcinomas

2004· article· en· W1985736476 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Taussky, Pavel Dulguerov, Abdelkarim S. Allal

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConcomitantSalvage surgerySurgerySalvage therapyRadiation therapyRadical surgeryStage (stratigraphy)CancerHead and neck cancerFistulaChemotherapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Definitive radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancer is increasingly used to preserve organ function, whereas surgery is reserved for treatment failure. However, data are sparse regarding the feasibility of salvage surgery, particularly for unselected patients after accelerated RT. METHODS: From 1991 to 2001, 297 patients, most with stage III to IV cancer (Union Internationale Contre le Cancer) were treated with concomitant boost RT (median dose, 69.9 Gy in 41 fractions) with or without chemotherapy (in 33%, usually cisplatin with or without 5-fluorouracil). The 75 patients seen with local and/or regional failure were studied. We analyzed the factors influencing the decision to attempt surgical salvage, the oncologic outcome, and the associated complications. RESULTS: Seventeen (23%) of the 75 patients had a salvage operation. This included all five patients with laryngeal cancers but only 16% to 20% of patients with tumors in other locations. Most patients could not be operated on because of disease extension (40%) and poor general condition/advanced age (30%). Patients with low initial primary T and N classification were more likely to undergo surgery (p = .002 and .014, respectively). Median post-recurrence survival was significantly better for patients who had salvage operations than for those without surgical salvage treatment (44 vs 11 months, p = .0001). Thirteen patients were initially seen with postoperative complications (mostly delayed wound healing and fistula formation). CONCLUSIONS: After definitive accelerated RT with the concomitant boost technique, only a minority of patients with local or regional recurrence underwent salvage surgery. Disease stage, tumor location, and patient's general condition at the initial diagnosis seemed to be the main factors influencing the decision to attempt surgical salvage. For patients with initially resectable disease who undergo radical nonsurgical treatment, more effective follow-up is needed to favor early detection of treatment failure, which may lead to a timely and effective salvage surgery.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207