Continuous infusion of 5-FU with split-dose cisplatin: An effective treatment for advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if a combination chemotherapy, using continuous intravenous infusion of fluorouracil (5-FU) in combination with split-dose cisplatin, in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell could improve previously reported clinical outcomes. METHODS: Forty-two patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell cancer were treated by cisplatin (25 mg/m(2)/day on days 1-3) and 5-FU (750 mg/m(2)/day for 120 hours; continuous intravenous infusion on days 1 through 5) with a cycle that repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, 8 (19.1%) showed complete response and 12 (28.5%) demonstrated a partial response, giving an overall response rate of 47.6%. Response rates were significantly different for patients undergoing initial treatment vs. re-treatment:73.6% (14/19) vs. 25.9% (6/23), respectively (χ(2)=9.45, P < 0.05). Median time to progression was 7.2 months and median overall survival was 13.7 months. The 1 year survival was 57.1%. Toxicity mainly included myelo-suppression, mucositis, nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with 5-FU by continuous intravenous infusion in combination with split-dose cisplatin is effective with a tolerable toxicity profile in patients with recurrent, or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of head and neck. The overall response was significantly higher in patients undergoing initial treatment in comparison with patients undergoing re-treatment after relapse.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".