Clinical outcomes in patients with T4 laryngeal cancer treated with primary radiotherapy versus primary laryngectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of T4 laryngeal cancers. METHODS: T4 laryngeal cancers treated with curative intent from January 2003 to December 2010 were analyzed. Outcomes were evaluated in both primary radiotherapy (+/- chemotherapy) (RT/CRT) and primary surgery cohorts. RESULTS: Among the 65 primary RT/CRT and 42 primary surgery patients included, median follow-up was 4.4 years. There was a trend for improved locoregional control with surgery (74% vs 88%; p = .08). In the RT/CRT group the 3-year laryngectomy-free survival was 67%. The 2-year gastrostomy dependency rate was 23% with RT/CRT versus 6% with primary surgery (p = .07). Overall survival (OS) at 3 years was significantly lower in the RT/CRT versus primary surgery group (41% vs 70%; p < .01). CONCLUSION: Laryngeal preservation is achieved in over two thirds of patients with primary RT/CRT. Patients with low volume minimal cartilage involvement T4 disease may be best suited to RT/CRT. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E2035-E2040, 2016.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".