MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086965384 · doi:10.1258/ijsa.2008.008345

Laryngeal cancer in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

2009· article· en· W2086965384 on OpenAlexaff
Sagit Shushan, Udi Cinamon, Dalia Levy, M Sokolov, Yehudah Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of STD & AIDS · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapySurgeryLarynxTracheotomyCancerCarcinomaDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With improved survival, more AIDS patients, especially heavy smokers and alcohol abusers, may be confronted with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Since curative treatment may require aggressive combined therapy, these patients, often suffering from immunosupression and poor general condition, present unique therapeutic challenges. The objective of the study was to describe treatment dilemmas. This case report presents a detailed description of an AIDS patient with carcinoma of the larynx. A patient with T3N0M0 laryngeal carcinoma and AIDS underwent tracheotomy and biopsy, followed by severe neck and pulmonary infection. After convalescence, radiotherapy was administered, with no evidence of a disease during a 3.5-year follow-up. During his remaining life, the patient developed severe psychoaffective disorder, his immune state deteriorated until he demised from sepsis. In conclusion, patients with HIV infection, especially having a history of tobacco or alcohol abuse, should be carefully examined for head and neck carcinoma that is likely to be more aggressive. Following surgery, AIDS patients may have worse wound healing and a greater tendency to contract infections. Radiotherapy and especially chemotherapy may cause life-threatening complications. Although early detection may increase survival, curative treatment should involve many disciplines and extra caution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of STD & AIDSSame topicViral-associated cancers and disordersFrench-language works237,207