Patterns of Distant Failure and Second Primary Cancers in Patients with Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Implications for Surveillance Methodology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We analyzed the pattern of distant metastasis (DM) and secondary primary cancers (SPC) in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) to develop surveillance guidelines. Methods: A retrospective review of 177 patients with OPSCC treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy ± chemotherapy between 2002 and 2012 was performed to characterize the rate, pattern, and timing of DM and SPC. Results: Sixteen patients (9.0%) developed DM and 9 patients (5.1%) developed a SPC. Overall, 24/177 patients (13.6%) developed a DM and/or SPC for a total of 27 events. 92.6% (25/27) of events were detectable on physical exam and/or chest CT. p16+ patients developed DM later than p16- tumors (23.4 months versus 8.7 months). Conclusions: Chest CT with physical examination detects the majority of DM and SPC in patients with OPSCC and would provide effective surveillance in these patients. A risk adapted surveillance strategy is proposed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it