Management of the Neck in N0 Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mortality in treated squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity is most often owing to locoregional failure. In an attempt to improve survival, an aggressive approach to surgical management is often favoured. Although it is generally accepted that the N0 neck should be treated if the risk of micrometastatic disease exceeds 20%, there is little direct support in the literature for this position. A retrospective review of all patients presenting with T1-2, N0 squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity treated at the Cancer Control Agency of British Columbia from 1985 to 1994 was conducted. Patients were followed for a minimum of 5 years with documentation of patterns of recurrence and disease-specific survival relative to initial management. The decision regarding management of the neck was frequently made to accommodate treatment of the primary site or reconstructive strategies. Thirteen percent of patients with T1, N0 disease underwent prophylactic neck dissection. No significant difference in outcome was noted in this group. Thirty-three percent of patients with T2, N0 disease underwent prophylactic neck dissection. There was a trend toward improved 5-year survival and lower recurrence rates in the group whose necks were treated, but the difference was not found to be statistically significant. In conclusion, this review showed a trend toward increased survival with prophylactic treatment of the neck in T2, N0 squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, but a larger study would be needed to show a statistically significant benefit.
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 | 0.001 | 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".