Retrospective analysis of the clinical efficacy of concurrent weekly cisplatinum – radiotherapy for patients with laryngeal carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and aim: Laryngeal preservation with concurrent chemo-radiation is an effective, alternative management forcancer larynx. Three weekly cis-platinum concurrent with radiotherapy (RT) considered the standard. However, weekly cisplatinumhas proven very effective for advanced head and neck carcinoma. We review our data to prove the efficacy and safety ofweekly cis-platinum plus RT for laryngeal preservation. Patients and methods: Untreated 64 patients with advanced laryngeal carcinoma were retrospectively analyzed. Patients offeredfor 6 weeks of cis-platinum 40 mg/m 2 concurrent with conformal RT; 70 Gy delivered to gross primary and lymph nodes. Results: Forty-six (71.8%) patients had complete remission (CR). Early stages had better CR than late stages. Median follow upwas 40 months. Three years DFS and OS were 69% and 77% respectively. Larynx preservation survival at 3 years was 73%.Protocol of treatment was tolerable, grade 3 or 4 acute and late toxic effects were reported in 25% of the included cases. Conclusion: Weekly cis-platinum could be effective and safe. We need to evaluate this protocol prospectively and compare itwith three-weekly high dose cis-platinum with concomitant radiotherapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".