A Pilot Study of Chemoradiotherapy With Weekly Docetaxel for Thoracic Esophageal Carcinoma With T4 and/or M1 Lymph Node Metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients with unresectable or inoperable esophageal carcinoma are usually treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. The present standard regimen is radiation with concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil. However, significant toxicities have been observed. The efficacy and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with weekly docetaxel for head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma and non-small cell lung cancer have already been recognized. We conducted a pilot study of definitive chemoradiotherapy with weekly docetaxel for advanced esophageal carcinoma. Methods: Nine patients with advanced thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma having a T4 tumor and/or distant lymph node metastasis (M1 LYM) were enrolled. Docetaxel was administered concurrently with 60 Gy of radiation by drip infusion at a dose of 10 mg/m 2 for an hour once per week and 6 times in total. Results: All 9 patients completed the treatment schedule without any suspension. Grade 3 or higher hematological and biochemical toxicities did not occur. Two patients achieved complete response, and 4 achieved partial response. The response rate was 67%. The median survival time was 16.2 months and the 2-year survival rate was 38.9%. Conclusions: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with weekly low dose docetaxel is a safe and effective treatment regimen for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We expect that this protocol of chemoradiotherapy may be one of the choices of treatment substituting the regimen with cisplatin and fluorouracil, particularly for the patients for whom chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil is considered inappropriate because of concomitant renal dysfunction or prior failure of systemic chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil. World J Oncol. 2011;2(5):252-258 doi: https://doi.org/10.4021/wjon407w
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".