Evaluating the use of external beam radiation alone in the management of cervix cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim To determine the outcome of patients with locally advanced cervix cancer treated with curative intent using external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), without brachytherapy. Materials and methods A chart review was performed of all patients with cervix cancer who received EBRT alone at our centre from 2000 to 2010. Overall survival and local control were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves. Results In total, 22 patients were identified. The median age and follow-up were 56 years and 65 months, respectively. The stage included IB to IVB. Main histology was squamous cell carcinoma (82%). Median tumour size was 5·5 cm. Majority treated with 3D conformal techniques and nine patients (41%) were treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT); 14 patients received doses of ≥65 Gy. Most patients (73%) received weekly concurrent cis-platinum. The major reason for not receiving brachytherapy was locally extensive tumour (59%). The 5-year relapse-free survival and overall survival rates were 57 and 50%, respectively. Seven patients (32%) had a component of loco-regional failure, mainly within the cervix. There was a better outcome among the nine patients treated with IMRT to a median dose of 66 Gy with a loco-regional control of 78%. Conclusions Patients who cannot have brachytherapy may still achieve acceptable rates of loco-regional disease control if high radiation doses (>65 Gy) was delivered.
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 | 0.002 | 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".