EP-1291: Can mucosal criteria estimate response in rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
________________________________________________________________________________ treatment; 1 had an ileostomy.Two patients (25%) required prolonged admission, 1 was admitted to critical care with neutropenic colitis.Capecitabine was discontinued in 6/8 (75%); 5 (63%) required a break in XRT.Two patients (25%) discontinued XRT altogether.Mean small bowel V45 for patients who did and did not develop G3 toxicity was 38.6 cm3 (range 0 -178.8)and 113.0 cm3 (38.4 -222.4)respectively.Two patients had a small bowel V45 >195 cm3, both developed G3 bowel toxicity. Conclusion:In this series, incidence of G3 bowel toxicity in patients receiving chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer was not influenced by gender, age, pre-treatment bowel habit or body habitus.PTV size, patient positioning and radiotherapy delivery technique did not alter the risk.Patients who developed G3 toxicity had a larger volume of small bowel receiving ≥45 Gy.Based on this, we now routinely calculate dose to small bowel, thus identifying patients who are at higher risk of developing G3 toxicity and review or change the treatment plan, including chemotherapy dose, to mitigate this risk. EP-1291 Can mucosal criteria estimate response in rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy?A.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".