Asian Versus Non-Asian Outcomes in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A North American Population-based Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The effect of ethnicity on nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) outcomes is unclear. This retrospective analysis examines survival and the impact of concurrent chemoradiation (chemoRT) among Asian and non-Asian patients. METHODS: Subjects included 380 consecutive patients with NPC treated at a Canadian institution from 2000 to 2009. Five-year Kaplan-Meier progression-free survival (PFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between Asian (n=279) and non-Asian (n=101) subjects. Multivariable analysis was performed using Cox regression modeling. Two-variable interaction terms with concurrent chemoRT were used to examine whether concurrent chemoRT conferred different effects among subgroups. RESULTS: Asian subjects presented with earlier stage (P=0.005), were younger, had better performance status, and were less likely smokers (all P<0.001). Survival among Asian versus non-Asian subjects with stage I/II NPC were: PFS 68% versus 59% (P=0.04), DSS 87% versus 77% (P=0.08), and OS 84% versus 74% (P=0.003). Corresponding rates with stage III/IVA/IVB disease were PFS 49% versus 42% (P=0.12), DSS 72% versus 46% (P=0.001), and OS 70% versus 44% (P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, Asian ethnicity, age below 65 years, ECOG performance status 0-1, early stage, staging MRI use, and concurrent chemoRT were associated with improved DSS and OS (P<0.05). On testing interactions with concurrent chemoRT, Asian versus non-Asian ethnicity was significant (hazard ratio 3.9), suggesting that concurrent chemoRT conferred more benefit among non-Asian compared with Asian subjects. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, Asian ethnicity was associated with improved DSS and OS. Concurrent chemoRT conferred more benefit among non-Asian compared with Asian subjects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".