Functional outcomes after treatment of advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma with radiation or chemoradiation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report survival and longitudinal functional outcomes after radiation or chemoradiation in advanced-stage cancers of the oropharynx. METHODS: A population-based cohort of 89 patients with stage III and IV oropharygeal carcinoma treated from 2003 to 2008 with conformal radiation or chemoradiation was followed. Patients were assessed with a standardized prospective clinical functional outcomes protocol pretreatment and at regular intervals posttreatment. The standard clinical functional outcomes protocol followed: performance status (Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS], Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG]); swallowing status (performance status scale for head and neck cancer patients [PSS-HN] and Royal Brisbane Hospital Swallowing Scale [RBHOMS]); and speech (PSS-HN and Voice Handicap Index-10 [VHI-10]). RESULTS: The primary site was the base of the tongue in 38 (43%) and tonsil or soft palate in 51 (57%) patients. Chemotherapy was used in 73%. The median follow-up was 3.4 years. At 3 years, overall survival was 72.3% and disease-free survival was 71.8%. Function reached a nadir at 3 months. At 36 months, the KPS was 90 or better in 76% and the ECOG was 0 in 75%. Total or partial feeding tube dependency ranged from 46% at 3 months to 3% at 2 years. Oral diet texture showed prolonged impairment, with 85% of survivors requiring a soft or semisolid diet with fluids at 36 months. Sixty-two percent were able to eat in public without restriction. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients will have a good functional outcome after radiation or chemoradiation for advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma. We now have a functional benchmark to which we can compare the results of primary surgery and newer treatment techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiation treatment.
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".