Phase 3 Randomized Trial on Larynx Preservation Comparing Sequential vs Alternating Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both induction chemotherapy followed by irradiation and concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy have been reported as valuable alternatives to total laryngectomy in patients with advanced larynx or hypopharynx cancer. We report results of the randomized phase 3 trial 24954 from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. METHODS: Patients with resectable advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx (tumor stage T3-T4) or hypopharynx (T2-T4), with regional lymph nodes in the neck staged as N0-N2 and with no metastasis, were randomly assigned to treatment in the sequential (or control) or the alternating (or experimental) arm. In the sequential arm, patients with a 50% or more reduction in primary tumor size after two cycles of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil received another two cycles, followed by radiotherapy (70 Gy total). In the alternating arm, a total of four cycles of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (in weeks 1, 4, 7, and 10) were alternated with radiotherapy with 20 Gy during the three 2-week intervals between chemotherapy cycles (60 Gy total). All nonresponders underwent salvage surgery and postoperative radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to obtain time-to-event data. RESULTS: The 450 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (224 to the sequential arm and 226 to the alternating arm). Median follow-up was 6.5 years. Survival with a functional larynx was similar in sequential and alternating arms (hazard ratio of death and/or event = 0.85, 95% confidence interval = 0.68 to 1.06), as were median overall survival (4.4 and 5.1 years, respectively) and median progression-free interval (3.0 and 3.1 years, respectively). Grade 3 or 4 mucositis occurred in 64 (32%) of the 200 patients in the sequential arm who received radiotherapy and in 47 (21%) of the 220 patients in the alternating arm. Late severe edema and/or fibrosis was observed in 32 (16%) patients in the sequential arm and in 25 (11%) in the alternating arm. CONCLUSIONS: Larynx preservation, progression-free interval, and overall survival were similar in both arms, as were acute and late toxic effects.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".