Esophageal pathology in patients after treatment for head and neck cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of esophageal pathology following treatment for primary head and neck cancer (HNCA). STUDY DESIGN: Case series with planned data collection. SETTING: Academic medical practice. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects comprised HNCA survivors. Esophagoscopy was prospectively performed on 100 patients at least three months after treatment for HNCA. Patient demographics including cancer stage, cancer treatment, use of reflux medications, symptoms surveys, and esophageal findings were prospectively determined. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 64 (+/- 10) years; 75 percent were male. The mean time between the end of treatment and endoscopy was 40 (+/- 51) months. Eighty-one percent of HNCA was advanced stage (3 or 4). The distribution of site of the primary HNCA was as follows: oropharynx (38%), larynx (33%), oral cavity (17%), unknown primary (10%), hypopharynx (1%), and nasopharynx (1%). Treatment modalities included surgery alone (15%), surgery with radiation (34%), radiation alone (6%), chemoradiation alone (24%), and chemoradiation with surgery (20%). The findings on esophagoscopy included peptic esophagitis (63%), stricture (23%), candidiasis (9%), Barrett metaplasia (8%), gastritis (4%), and carcinoma (4%). Only 13 percent had a normal esophagoscopy. CONCLUSION: Esophageal pathology is extremely common in patients treated for HNCA. These findings support routine esophageal screening after HNCA 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".