Primary treatment for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in Alberta, Canada: A population‐based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is increasing and has better survival than non-HPV related oropharyngeal SCC. This study compared surgical to nonsurgical treatments and demographic, clinical, and survival differences in patients with oropharyngeal SCC, stratified by p16 status. METHODS: We assembled a cohort of adult patients with oropharyngeal SCC diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 in Alberta. The tumor p16 biomarker was measured using fluorescent immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In this cohort, p16 data were available for 115 of 357 patients; and 66% (n = 76) were p16-positive. Patients with p16 data had comparable outcomes to those without. Surgically treated p16-negative patients had improved 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) compared with nonsurgical patients. There were no differences in survival outcomes between surgical and nonsurgical treatment for patients with p16-positive disease. CONCLUSION: Patients with p16-positive oropharyngeal SCC had similar outcomes regardless of treatment. Patients with p16-negative tumors may benefit from primary surgery with postoperative adjuvant therapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".