Role of neck dissection following concurrent chemoradiation for advanced head and neck carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our primary objective was to determine the role of neck dissection following concomitant chemoradiation (CRT) for advanced stage III-IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: One hundred eighty-four patients with HNSCC treated with CRT were included. One hundred twenty-three patients reached a regional complete response (CR) after CRT and no neck dissection was performed. Forty-five patients among the 58 who reached a regional partial response (PR) underwent a neck dissection. RESULTS: Overall, regional CR rate after CRT was 68%. Patients who reached a regional CR (no neck dissection) had an overall neck recurrence rate of 5%. Patients with regional PR who underwent a neck dissection had a 7% neck recurrence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with regional CR not followed by a neck dissection have a low rate of neck recurrence. Systematic neck dissection is not mandatory for patients with nodes less than 6 cm reaching a regional CR. For patients with nodes larger than 6 cm, no firm recommendation can be given because of the small number of patients in this series. If the regional response is incomplete, cervical dissection is warranted.
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) | 0.001 | 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".