Heart irradiation as a risk factor for radiation pneumonitis
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
PURPOSE: to investigate the potential role of incidental heart irradiation on the risk of radiation pneumonitis (RP) for patients receiving definitive radiation therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: two hundred and nine patient datasets were available for this study. Heart and lung dose-volume parameters were extracted for modeling, based on Monte Carlo-based heterogeneity corrected dose distributions. Clinical variables tested included age, gender, chemotherapy, pre-treatment weight-loss, performance status, and smoking history. The risk of RP was modeled using logistic regression. RESULTS: the most significant univariate variables were heart related, such as heart heart V65 (percent volume receiving at least 65 Gy) (Spearman Rs = 0.245, p < 0.001). The best-performing logistic regression model included heart D10 (minimum dose to the hottest 10% of the heart), lung D35, and maximum lung dose (Spearman Rs = 0.268, p < 0.0001). When classified by predicted risk, the RP incidence ratio between the most and least risky 1/3 of treatments was 4.8. The improvement in risk modeling using lung and heart variables was better than using lung variables alone. CONCLUSIONS: these results suggest a previously unsuspected role of heart irradiation in many cases of RP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it