MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129615850 · doi:10.1259/bjr.20140646

0-7-21 hypofractionated palliative radiotherapy: an effective treatment for advanced head and neck cancers

2015· article· en· W2129615850 on OpenAlexaff
N-T A Nguyen, Lilian Doerwald-Munoz, Hualin Zhang, Stephen M. Sagar, James R. Wright, D. Ian Hodson

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital EdmontonJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRegimenRadiation therapyStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineProportional hazards modelLogistic regressionAdverse effectHead and neck cancerHead and neckOncologyResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsChemotherapyProgressive diseaseSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We report our experience in providing palliative radiotherapy (RT) to patients with head and neck cancers (HNCs). Our hypofractionated regimen, "0-7-21", treats patients with 24 Gy in three fractions. METHODS: Patients, disease and response data were retrieved for candidates of 0-7-21 from 2005 to 2012. Primary end points included symptom and tumour size responses to RT based on response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) guidelines. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) within the irradiated field, overall survival (OS) and symptomatic PFS (SPFS), calculated using Kaplan-Meier method and adverse events. Cox proportional hazards regression and logistic regression were used to investigate for prognostic factors. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients were included. Among the patients, 40% and 31% had complete response for symptoms and tumour size, respectively; 42% and 50% had partial response for symptoms and tumour size, respectively; and 15% had stability of symptoms and tumour size. Median 6-month OS was 51%, and PFS within the irradiated field was 39%. Planning target volume was predictive of OS (p < 0.001), PFS (p < 0.001) and SPFS (p < 0.005), while higher TNM stage was associated with poorer tumour response (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: 0-7-21 is an effective and well-tolerated palliative RT regimen for patients with HNC. There was excellent symptom and local control with acceptable toxicity profile in these patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first study to describe the outcomes of 0-7-21 in treating advanced HNCs. The positive results suggest that 0-7-21 provides excellent palliation with minimal toxicity, with significantly less on-treatment time than current published palliative RT regimen.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations49
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207