Preliminary results of adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer patients using a shortened overall treatment time – a population study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is estimated that in Poland every year about 4000 women after radical mastectomy or breast conserving surgery require of adjuvant radiotherapy [1]. The shortages in the number of megavoltage units resulted in lengthening of waiting time for treatment. One of the methods of improving irradiation accessibility is the application of radiotherapy in shorter treatment time, i.e. slightly increasing the dose per fraction and decreasing the total dose, so the biologically equivalent dose is comparable to that used in conventional radiotherapy. Hypofractionation involves the use of fraction doses greater than 3 Gy, while fraction doses of 2.25 Gy and 2.8 Gy are considered conventional [2]. Such a shortened schedule of adjuvant fractionated radiotherapy is commonly used in Great Britain and in Canada [3-5]; yet in Poland there is some apprehension as to the possible complications and therefore it is rarely applied. [6, 7]. Clinical data suggests that shortened irradiation with fraction doses of 2.25 Gy and 2.5 Gy is equivalent to 2 Gy fractionation regarding local control, the risk of complications and the cosmetic effect [2-7]. A prospective population-based study of shortened adjuvant radiotherapy regimen for breast cancer patients was planned. This approach not only allows to treat a greater number of patients, shortens the waiting time for irradiation and is more comfortable for the patients, but it is also more economical, as it allows to cut the costs of therapy, the hospitalization and transportation of patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".