Interstitial low-dose-rate brachytherapy in the treatment of recurrent head and neck malignancies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recurrent head and neck malignancies are therapeutically challenging. Brachytherapy is a retreatment alternative to external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). METHODS: Patients receiving brachytherapy during 1987-2004 for recurrent head and neck cancer were identified. Tumor and treatment characteristics and toxicities were recorded. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) estimates were generated. The influence of prognostic factors was determined. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were analyzable. Analysis was limited to patients who had brachytherapy for a first recurrence (n = 45). Brachytherapy (> or = 55 Gy) was a monotherapy in 22 of 45 patients. As part of their salvage brachytherapy treatments, 14 patients also underwent surgery; 3 patients also underwent EBRT; and 6 patients underwent surgery, EBRT, and brachytherapy. Retreatment morbidity included acute toxicity (n = 7) and late toxicity (n = 18). Median PFS was 15 months, and locoregional control rates at 1 and 2 years were 50% and 37%, respectively. Time to progression differed by site of the primary tumor (p = .10). Median OS was 16 months, and OS at 2 and 5 years was 33% and 11%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Brachytherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer has an acceptable toxicity profile and is viable alternative to EBRT. Further optimization of the best sites and doses for neck brachytherapy is required.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".