MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099738989 · doi:10.1016/j.prro.2011.01.005

Palliative thoracic radiotherapy in lung cancer: An American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based clinical practice guideline

2011· article· en· W2099738989 on OpenAlexaff
George Rodrigues, Gregory M.M. Videtic, Ranjan Sur, Andrea Bezjak, Jeffrey D. Bradley, Carol A. Hahn, Corey J. Langer, Keith L. Miller, Benjamin J. Moeller, Kenneth E. Rosenzweig, Benjamin Movsas

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical Radiation Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTracheal and airway disorders
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreJuravinski Cancer CentreLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology
KeywordsMedicineBrachytherapyRadiation therapyGuidelineExternal beam radiotherapyPalliative careLung cancerDose fractionationRadiologyChemotherapyOncologySurgeryNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To provide guidance to physicians and patients with regard to the use of external beam radiotherapy, endobronchial brachytherapy, and concurrent chemotherapy in the setting of palliative thoracic treatment for lung cancer, based on available evidence complemented by expert opinion. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Task Force authorized by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Board of Directors synthesized and assessed evidence from 3 systematic reviews on the following topics: (1) dose fractionation in thoracic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT); (2) clinical utility of initial and salvage endobronchial brachytherapy (EBB); and (3) use of concurrent chemotherapy (CC) with palliative thoracic radiotherapy. Practice guideline recommendations were produced and are contained herein. RESULTS: Studies suggest that higher dose/fractionation palliative EBRT regimens (eg, 30 Gy/10 fraction equivalent or greater) are associated with modest improvements in survival and total symptom score, particularly in patients with good performance status. As these improvements are associated with an increase in esophageal toxicity, various shorter EBRT dose/fractionation schedules (eg, 20 Gy in 5 fractions, 17 Gy in 2 weekly fractions, 10 Gy in 1 fraction), which provide good symptomatic relief with fewer side effects, can be used for patients requesting a shorter treatment course and/or in those with a poor performance status. No defined role for EBB in the routine initial palliative treatment of chest disease has been demonstrated; however, EBB can be a reasonable option for the palliation of endobronchial lesions causing obstructive symptomatology including lung collapse, or for hemoptysis after EBRT failure. The integration of concurrent chemotherapy with palliative intent/fractionated radiotherapy is not currently supported by the medical literature. CONCLUSION: This Guideline is intended to serve as a guide for the use of EBRT, EBB, and CC in thoracic palliation of lung cancer outside the clinical trial setting. Further prospective clinical investigations with relevant palliative endpoints into the respective roles of EBB and CC/targeted therapy in the thoracic palliation of lung cancer are warranted, given the current state of the medical literature in these areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations211
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractical Radiation OncologySame topicTracheal and airway disordersFrench-language works237,207