MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553493178 · doi:10.1186/s40463-016-0172-0

Correlation between clinical and MRI assessment of depth of invasion in oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma

2016· article· en· W2553493178 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTongueRadiographyStage (stratigraphy)PathologicalRadiologyTongue NeoplasmBiopsyMetastasisRadiological weaponBasal cellNuclear medicinePathologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neck metastasis is the most important prognostic factor in oral cavity squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). Apart from the T- stage, depth of invasion has been used as a highly predictable factor for microscopic neck metastasis, despite the controversy on the exact depth cut off point. Depth of invasion can be determined clinically and radio logically. However, there is no standard tool to determine depth of invasion preoperatively. Although MRI is used widely to stage the head and neck disease, its utility in depth evaluation has not formally been assessed. OBJECTIVE: To compare preoperative clinical and radiological depth evaluation in oral tongue SCC using the standard pathological depth. To compare clinical and radiological accuracy between superficial (<5 mm) vs. deep invaded tumor (≥5 mm) METHODS: This prospective study used consecutive biopsy-proven oral tongue invasive SCC that presented to the University health network (UHN), Toronto. Clinical examination, radiological scan and appropriate staging were determined preoperatively. Standard pathology reports postoperatively were reviewed to determine the depth of invasion from the tumor specimen. RESULTS: 72 tumour samples were available for analysis and 53 patients were included. For all tumors, both clinical depth (r = 0.779; p < 0.001) and radiographic depth (r =0.907; p <0.001) correlated well with pathological depth, with radiographic depth correlating slightly better. Clinical depth also correlated well with radiographic depth (r = 0.731; p < 0.001). By contrast, for superficial tumors (less than 5 mm on pathological measurement) neither clinical (r = 0.333, p = 0.34) nor radiographic examination (r = - 0.211; p = 0.56) correlated with pathological depth of invasion. CONCLUSION: This is the first study evaluating the clinical assessment of tumor thickness in comparison to radiographic interpretation in oral cavity cancer. There are strong correlations between pathological, radiological, and clinical measurements in deep tumors (≥5 mm). In superficial tumors (<5 mm), clinical and radiological examination had low correlation with pathological thickness.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it