MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592087425 · doi:10.3747/co.24.3358

Guideline for Radiotherapy with Curative Intent in Patients with Early-Stage Medically Inoperable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2017· article· en· W2592087425 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Conrad Falkson, Emily T. Vella, E. Yu, Medhat El-Mallah, Ross MacKenzie, Peter Ellis, Y. Ung

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreJuravinski Cancer CentreRegional Municipality of DurhamLakeridge HealthQueen's UniversityCancer Care OntarioMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityKingston General Hospital
FundersCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineLung cancerRadiation therapyAdverse effectStage (stratigraphy)Dose fractionationRadiation treatment planningMedical physicsIntensive care medicineOncologyRadiologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: For this guideline, we investigated the effectiveness of radiotherapy with curative intent in medically inoperable patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). Methods: The guideline was developed by Cancer Care Ontario’s Program in Evidence-Based Care and by the Lung Cancer Disease Site Group through a systematic review of mainly retrospective studies, expert consensus, and formal internal and external reviews. Recommendations: 1. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (sbrt) with curative intent is an option that should be considered for patients with early-stage, node-negative, medically inoperable nsclc. Qualifying Statements (1) Because of the high dose per fraction, the planning process and treatment delivery for sbrt require the use of advanced technology to maintain an appropriate level of safety. Consistent patient positioning and 4-dimensional analysis of tumour and critical structure motion during simulation and treatment delivery are essential. (2) Preliminary results for proton-beam therapy have been promising, but the technique requires further clinical study. 2. Recommended fractionation schemes for sbrt should result in a biologically effective dose of 100 or greater by the linear quadric model, choosing an α/β value of 10 [bed10(LQ) ≥ 100]. Qualifying Statements (1) Because of the increased risk of treatment-related adverse events associated with centrally located tumours, consideration of tumour size and proximity to critical central structures is required when determining the dose and fractionation. (2) Examples of dose–fractionation schemes used in the included studies have been provided. (3) Based on the current evidence and the opinion of the authors, radiation doses at bed10(LQ) greater than 146 might significantly increase toxicity and should be avoided. (4) Determination of the radiation bed by the linear quadratic model has limitations for the extreme hypofractionated schemes used in sbrt.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207