Impact of Adoption of Chemoradiotherapy on the Outcome of Cervical Cancer in Ontario: Results of a Population-Based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the adoption of concurrent cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (C-CRT), and to evaluate its impact on the outcome of cervical cancer in Ontario. METHODS: We used a population-based cancer registry to identify the 4,069 patients with invasive carcinoma of the cervix diagnosed in Ontario between 1992 and 2001. We linked electronic records of treatment to the registry. We described time trends in the use of C-CRT, and we compared survival before and after widespread adoption of C-CRT. RESULTS: Over the study period, the proportion of patients treated with primary radical radiotherapy (RT) remained constant at approximately 42%. Between 1992 and 1998, less than 10% of RT cases received chemotherapy. Early in 1999, there was rapid adoption of C-CRT. Between 1999 and 2001, more than 60% of RT cases received C-CRT. There was a contemporaneous increase in overall 3-year survival from 71.1% in the 1995 to 1998 cohort to 75.9% in the 1999 to 2001 cohort (P = .03). There was no change in survival in patients treated with surgery alone. However, there was a significant increase in 3-year survival from 58.6% in the 1995 to 1998 cohort to 69.8% in the 1999 to 2001 cohort (P < .01) in the subpopulation of patients treated with primary RT +/- chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: The adoption of C-CRT was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival of cervical cancer at the population level. The magnitude of the benefit of C-CRT in the general population was consistent with the results of the relevant clinical trials.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".