Parotid squamous cell carcinoma: Outcome of multidisplinary management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose : To evaluate the origin and outcome of parotid squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) Methods and patients : Fifty nine patients were identified with parotid SCC through the hospital data-base, patients’ charts, imaging studies and computerized notes. Results : Fifty of the patients were diagnosed as metastatic SCC from skin primary cancer to parotid lymph nodes; 28% were immunocompromized and 9 patients were diagnosed as primary SCC of the parotid gland, none was immunocompromized. Forty seven patients with metastatic SCC were treated with surgery and post-operative radiotherapy. The rate of neck lymph node metastases was 54%. The median follow up of these patients was 33 months and the 3-year actuarial cause specific survival was 91%. The 3-year actuarial local recurrence free survival (LRFS) and disease free survival rate were 79% and 77% respectively. Positive surgical margin after parotidectomy was the only factor that had statistically significant poor LRFS. Patients with primary parotid SCC had DFS of 100%. Conclusion : The most common site of the primary tumor was a cutaneous SCC of the face. All patients should be considered for facial nerve sparing radical parotidectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. Neck dissection or elective neck irradiation for ipsilateral neck is recommended due to high occult LN metastasis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".